Conversation

“Misleading/needs context” seems to be an epistemic status that’s neither truth, nor lie, nor bullshit (ie indifferent to truth/falsehood). This type of assertion needs a name and some theorizing/steelmanning. Very unsatisfying/weak to accuse someone of this. Like “you’re mean!”
6
16
“Misleading” needs a clearer account. How is it done? Why is it bad faith? How can we prove intent to mislead? It’s not as simple as simply giving wrong directions knowingly (that would be a lie).
3
5
Replying to
Often the listener is primed to receive information in the context of a carefully curated (but misleading and politically-driven) narrative. To effectively convey new information in a field with a pre-existing narrative, you have to describe the larger context of the info
1
Replying to
I can think of several cases of careful curation - esp. where PR firms and lobbyists are involved. Health benefits of cigarettes in the 50's, grain-heavy food pyramid in the 70's. I'm sure you can find many others. Once you get the flywheel spinning, conformism keeps it going.
1
Show replies