disinformation.md 3.9 KB
DISINFORMATION This is a pet peeve of mine because we keep falling victim to attempts to subvert a standard for deductive reasoning and critical thinking. The idea is that though we are, of course, always most concerned abou tinformation which is absolutely false, we are now to be also concerned about information that is true under the presumption that it can be used to fool us. Notice the missing ingredient here? How are we to be fooled by truth unless there is some other information not being scrutinized? Not being focused upon? Well, it is more compelling to make the argument about disinformation if we focus on the idea that truth is misused and that the manner by which this is accomplished is so refined and clever that we can't be expected to be able to notice. And perhaps there is something to that, the whole notion that we need to always be on alert because, even if we're applying rigorous methods, and are attempting to use logic and reason instead of emotion, we are always at risk of being fooled and it's should never come as a huge surprise if it happens. At the same time, that doesn't mean that, even in thos esituations where we were fooled, we don't ever strive to have a better undertsanding of the details, the deceit, the manner in which the foolery took place. No, instead we focus on the identity of the participants of the conflict. So how does one know whether to accept the proposal? We assume the intent of another party, possibly those who most directly disseminate in the information in question, but possibly even with additional degrees of indirection. The problem with this thinking is foremost that we are forcing eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeereason to relinquish its primacy in our standard of evaluation. eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeettttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt How are we to know if something is disinformation? Merely on the suggestion that it is? Courtesy of someone who has zero interest as to whether or not opnions on the matter sway one way or another? Not bloody likely. In fact, one could make the case that those who would seek to convince you that a particular truth, believed to be true, is, in fact, the real disinformation. THe truth of the matter is that information is whether true or false, and extra steps to qualify its legitimacy are, in fact, a form of disinformation all the same (though one could argue about principal vs proportionality) exit