Re:The Social Media Problem
by joe_the_user on Wednesday August 12, 2020 @07:52PM
(#24138502)
I sort of agree except I'd say you need to talk about all claims having nothing to do with a person's own life.
Basically, throughout human existence, we have been guided by a lot of language that coded useful information about the world but on an abstract level was somewhere between false and meaningless. But abstract falseness didn't matter because it didn't directly impact our lives. I believe ancient hunter-gathers described a lot of their hunting method religiously. Animal spirits don't actual exist but I suspect one person can teach another concrete ways of hunting using these.
So, really, it's only a somewhat limited group that has good tools for sorting true abstractions from false abstractions from meaningless abstractions.
The 18th to 20th centuries saw a fortuitous coming together of interests where those with power found it in their interests to promote a greater rational understanding of the world, to promote tools that allow more people to determine the truth of these abstract ideas with little impact on their lives. And part of this was having somewhat truthful authorities, which allowed this rational understanding to be much easier since people didn't have to figure things out from the get-go.
Things don't look good going into the 21st century. The expanding area covered by science seems to be leading to less ability of even experts to verify basic science (PCR technician claiming viruses don't exist stands out in the OP). And rationality seems to be of less interest to the powerful.
Basically, throughout human existence, we have been guided by a lot of language that coded useful information about the world but on an abstract level was somewhere between false and meaningless. But abstract falseness didn't matter because it didn't directly impact our lives. I believe ancient hunter-gathers described a lot of their hunting method religiously. Animal spirits don't actual exist but I suspect one person can teach another concrete ways of hunting using these.
So, really, it's only a somewhat limited group that has good tools for sorting true abstractions from false abstractions from meaningless abstractions.
The 18th to 20th centuries saw a fortuitous coming together of interests where those with power found it in their interests to promote a greater rational understanding of the world, to promote tools that allow more people to determine the truth of these abstract ideas with little impact on their lives. And part of this was having somewhat truthful authorities, which allowed this rational understanding to be much easier since people didn't have to figure things out from the get-go.
Things don't look good going into the 21st century. The expanding area covered by science seems to be leading to less ability of even experts to verify basic science (PCR technician claiming viruses don't exist stands out in the OP). And rationality seems to be of less interest to the powerful.