Sure, it's a scale/speed thing. The only way out is anchor sources of reliable information - trustworthy organisations or people. Which explains the concerted effort politically to undermine the very concept of trust. It's horrible to see it playing out in real time.
Conversation
Replying to
No, I don't think we agree.
I'm suggesting the entire idea of reliability, in the context of people, is suspect.
Information is not impartial. It favors some interpretations over others. This incentivizes deception, and no org is trustworthy. Subversion is remarkably easy.
1
Look at all the supposedly neutral international treaties and organizations present today.
Can you find any that aren't controlled by some external actor, or group thereof?
And to think, this is just the visible tip.
1
Replying to
Sure, ultimately that's inevitable, but when it comes to trying to honestly form a personal understanding of what's actually going on in the world, what can the individual do but reach for a source of information that they trust?
2
Replying to
And thus we arrive at a "politics is an outgrowth of personal aesthetics"-type conclusion.
1
1
I tend to think the most accurate predictor of a person's beliefs is... what they want to believe, in the context of the beliefs available at the time.
1
1
1
Replying to
I think that's a pretty good summary. It took me a while to realise how malleable "belief" really is, at least for some people - I guess it's a spectrum, but some people really seem to be able to consciously decide a particular belief would be convenient and to run with it.
2
1
Replying to
What you're describing sounds like an unusually highly-cultivated version of this ability, probably very uncommon in neurotypicals.
Most people have a loose set of implicit and social motivations that steer them into these things, whether they want them to or not.
1
Replying to
I honestly don't know; I just see the apparent speed of a change of expressed opinion in, for example, American right-wing politics where dearly-held beliefs seem to spring up out of nowhere and wonder if people are being sincere, because they've decided which opinions fit.
1
1
Replying to
I think you're overestimating the strength of the non-utilitarian causes of expressed beliefs. We can't all be , y'know.
You could even argue that categorically & firmly principled stances are *abnormal*, and rarely a deciding element in how most people live their lives.
1
1
Which makes perfect sense, given that your propensity for holding beliefs has most probably evolved as some kind of survival tool, or is the outcome of one.
Not, however, so that you can be a "good person", or some other thing nature gives absolutely no fucks about whatsoever.
So when we see many people give little thought to anything else than "how do people I care about regard this?" before they opine about something, that seems perfectly consistent with what human beings *are*.
1
1
Right, which is kind of what I was trying to get at - even if you're actively trying to be objective, in reality the incentive to try to convince yourself that your peers (in whatever fashion) are correct, reasonable and honest is way too strong.
1
Show replies