About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unread


Sanction: 1, No Sanction: 0
Post 0

Wednesday, November 14, 2007 - 1:14pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Thanks for this article which stresses my own pet peeve: the growing lack of respect among people on both left and right for evidence, facts, logic, i.e. reason. As a sort of obsessive type, I see this scary tendency all around me. So many seem unwilling to "think outside their group"; or to see and accept facts that they don't like, as though the truth were optional; or to just lie for the sake of promoting some politcal end, treating truth contemptuously.

One guy that I find especially irresponsible is Bill O'Reilly. I recall a few years ago when he was trumpeting his outrage, on his radio program, at telemarketers. His arguments boiled down to the notion that phone sales people were violating the "privacy" of homeowners. Of course, being unreflective, it wouldn't occur to Mr. O'Reilly that "privacy" rests on private property rights; and that O'Reilly's favored restrictions on telephone sales violated the property rights of the telephone companies--owners of the phone lines who chose to rent to both telemarketers and homeowners. It also would never occur to No-Spin Bill, who's lookin' out for the folks, that just as telephone sales people "invade privacy" by phoning at meal time, a nuisance easily remedied by turning off the phone ringer; so the No-Spin Doctor "invades" the living rooms and cars of countless Americans on TV and radio. The technological similarities of telephones and radio or TV are remarkably similar. So is the solution to unwanted sales calls and undesireable political bombast: turn off the receiver for a while.

As the day approached when Congress would finally free Americans from "unethical intrusions" from telemarketers, O'Reilly invited a representative of the telemarketers to appear on his TV show. The next day, he announced to radio listeners that he had decided not to run the interview, because his guest's arguments were (paraphrasing) "outrageous". Translation: the telemarketer defender had just possibly articulated facts and reasoning that left the No-Spin Doctor sputtering and mad. My suspicion is that O'Reilly chose to delete the interview rather than to deal honestly with evidence and reasoning he could not refute.

The other day, I caught a brief TV encounter of O'Reilly interviewing John Stossel about global warming. I have often heard O'Reilly denigrate and name-call anyone who disputes the notion of anthropological global warming. Stossel is a well-known skeptic and critic of this green crusade, and sought to point out logical problems with the received wisdom of "scientific consensus" about this. O'Reilly, who seemed to like Stossel, remarked, in the tone of a confidence shared between buddies, (paraphrasing)"But don't you get tired of battling scientists? I don't have the patience to follow their arguments. I figure that Gore and others are fighting for clean air and clean water, they're fighting pollution, an' that's a good thing. We can use a cleaner planet. I don't much care about the science, one way or the other."

This from the No-Spin Guy who has ridiculed global warming skeptics as, if I recall correctly, "pin-heads" and "cool-aid drinkers" and "loony-tunes".


Sanction: 1, No Sanction: 0
Post 1

Wednesday, November 14, 2007 - 1:37pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
In "No Spin Zone" is the part of the brain where the gears don't turn so well.

Sanction: 1, No Sanction: 0
Post 2

Wednesday, November 14, 2007 - 8:30pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
But there's a simple way out of national bankruptcy.  Just read "My Struggle," by a certain Herr Schiklegrubber.  A whole world war just to clear the accounts.

Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 3

Thursday, November 15, 2007 - 8:55amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Will the Information Age make it easier or more difficult to determine the truth? 

Will future humans require brand new skills to separate truth from falsehood? 

If we are not able to filter out bad data and lies why make the effort to be reasonable?  

We Systems Engineers speak of this issue as maximizing the Signal to Noise ratio.  
But in the Information Age the Noise is increasing much faster than the Signals.      Dale


Post 4

Monday, November 19, 2007 - 12:14pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

Term

Definition

actor-observer difference

Differences in attribution based on who is making the causal assessment: the actor (who is relatively disposed to make situational attributions) or the observer (who is relatively disposed to make dispositional attributions).

 

attitude inoculation

 

Small attacks upon our beliefs that engage our attitudes, prior commitments, and knowledge structures, enabling us to counteract a subsequent larger attack and be resistant to persuasion.

augmentation principle

The idea that we should assign greater weight to a particular cause of behavior if there are other causes present that normally would produce the opposite outcome.

availability heuristic

The process whereby judgments of frequency or probability are based on the ease with which pertinent instances are brought to mind.

 

cognitive dissonance

 

The theory that inconsistencies among a person's thoughts, sentiments, and actions create an aversive emotional state (dissonance) that leads to efforts to restore consistency.

 

correspondence bias

The tendency to draw an inference about a person that "corresponds" to the behavior observed; also referred to as the fundamental attribution error.

counterfactual thoughts

Thoughts of what might have, could have, or should have happened "if only" something had been done differently.

ego-defensive function

An attitudinal function that enables us to maintain cherished beliefs about ourselves by protecting us from awareness of our negative attributes and impulses or from facts that contradict our cherished beliefs.

emotional amplification

A ratcheting up of an emotional reaction to an event that is proportional to how easy it is to imagine the event not happening.

false consensus effect

The tendency for people to think that their behavior (as well as their attitudes, preferences, or responses more generally) is relatively common.

framing effect

The influence on judgment resulting from the way information is presented, including the order of presentation.

 

fundamental attribution error

 

A tendency to believe that a behavior is due to a person's disposition rather than the situation in which the person finds himself.

 

identifiable victim effect

The tendency to be more moved by the plight of a single, vivid individual than by a more abstract aggregate of individuals.

illusory correlation

The belief that two variables are correlated when in fact they are not.

peripheral (heuristic)

route of persuasion

A persuasive route wherein people attend to relatively simple, superficial cues related to the message, such as the length of the message or the expertise or attractiveness of the communicator.

pluralistic ignorance

Misperception of a group norm that results from observing people who are acting at variance with their private beliefs out of a concern for the social consequences-behavior that reinforces the erroneous group norm.

primacy effect

The disproportionate influence on judgment of information presented first in a body of evidence.

recency effect

The disproportionate influence on judgment of information presented last in a body of evidence.

reference groups

Groups whose opinions matter to us and that affect our opinions and beliefs.

self-serving bias

The tendency to attribute failure and other bad events to external circumstances, but to attribute success and other good events to oneself.

sleeper effect

An effect that occurs when messages from unreliable sources initially exert little influence but later cause individuals' attitudes to shift.

subjective norms

People's beliefs about whether others are likely to approve of a course of action.

theory of planned behavior

The successor to the theory of reasoned action that maintains that the best predictors of deliberate behavior are people's attitudes toward specific behaviors, their subjective norms, and their beliefs about whether they can successfully perform the behavior in question.

third-person effect

The assumption by most people that "other people" are more prone to being influenced by persuasive messages (such as those in media campaigns) than they themselves are.

 

thought polarization

 

The hypothesis that more extended thought about a particular issue tends to produce more extreme, entrenched attitudes.

 



(Edited by Michael E. Marotta on 11/19, 12:17pm)


Post to this thread


User ID Password or create a free account.