Wisdom without Zealotry - Propaganda

"We have now sunk to a depth at which
the restatement of the obvious
is the first duty of intelligent men." George Orwell

 

Question. What have you read, seen, or listened to recently that you have identified as biased? What is bias? It is: prejudice in favor of or against one thing, person, or group compared with another, usually in a way considered to be unfair. How does a person or group push their prejudice to the masses? Through propaganda. Propaganda is defined as: information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view. Synonyms of propaganda include: spin, disinformation, counter-information, hype, alternative facts.

Why am I speaking about bias and propaganda? Because it is out there, on the left and right. "What?!?", some might say, "My side does not have bias nor does it lie and spread propaganda." Well, they do but it is especially heinous and disturbing when spread by the zealous left and right. By the zealous learned and uneducated. By those who are self-delusional. We all deep down want to be correct and acknowledged as such by others. It takes an acceptance of our ability to make errors in order to admit we are wrong. 

A zealot also redoubles their efforts to defend their views through further delusion, when confronted with facts, statistics, and truth. They will go through the gamut of denial, or F.L.I.C.C until their brain feels the sanctity of their delusion is intact and rewards the brain with a hit of dopamine. Seriously, that's how it works.

Here is what F.L.I.C.C means:
     F=Fake experts
     L=Logical fallacies (Red herring, Misrepresentation, Jumping to conclusions, False dichotomy)
     I=Impossible expectations
     C=Cherry picking
     C=Conspiracy theories

I present a transcription of the youtube video of the person who created it, John Cook.

“Firstly, fake experts are used to create the impression of an ongoing scientific debate. The general public rely on expert opinion as a guide for their own beliefs about science. For this reason, casting doubt on a scientific consensus is a key strategy for those looking to manufacture doubt about the science. Fake experts appear to be highly qualified but don’t have actual expertise in the relevant scientific field […] Number two is logical fallacies. These are logically false arguments that lead to an invalid conclusion. […] The third characteristic of science denial involves impossible expectations. This demands unrealistic standards of proof before acting on the science. […] Fourth, there’s cherry picking, which focuses on specific pieces of data, often out of context, while excluding any data that conflicts with the desired conclusion. […] Fifth and finally, when someone disagrees with an overwhelming scientific consensus, there is always the resort to conspiracy theories. How else would you explain that all the world’s experts, scientific organizations, and journals agree on something you disagree with?” For more on John Cook, go here to his website on skeptical climate science. So now that you know this, stop yourself before you fall into these traps or recognize them as they occur. Then you can cease your own illogical bias and the spreading of false facts. 

Also analyze what does the person or group, that spreads the misinformation have to gain. This data can be the key to the deconstruction of those lies made by those who emotionally cling to them or use for their own gain. 

Now back to propaganda, its out there and hard to counter because you don't know how far it has spread. All of us are responsible to stamp out propaganda and call it what it is. Some have made the effort and are making strides in their fields, like a group of climate scientists who decided to analyze the 38 papers that are the most referenced by climate change deniers. What they found was not extraordinary. Those 38 papers cherry picked data (ignoring 6000 years of data in one instance), ignored basic scientific processes (blaming the orbits of Jupiter and Saturn without giving a reason why that would affect climate in another), or don't agree with one another. This is contrary to the other 97-98% that do agree with the principles of climate change. 

I mentioned before that besides an emotional bias, there may be something else to gain. This comic explains it nicely. 

So if you see something wrong, analyze yourself so that you know you are not clinging to something emotively, then analyze the thing for what it is and what it is attempting to achieve. Nip that propaganda in the bud and spread the truth of the matter.