Excellent article. Thanks for the huge effort it has taken to put it together.
I am in Australia watching with horror the collapse of many of the US core beliefs.
I have been playing Substack for a while as an author but have only recently been trying to engage through "notes" with other authors thoughts and beliefs.
Sadly, I have not been able to escape the "climate denial" people and have been foolish enough to engage with them in debate. Clearly a hopeless task as they cannot separate their belief systems from facts.
Turns out that I recognise this is a much bigger problem than I appreciated. I can see that for myself much of what I hold as "facts" are in fact "beliefs" based on my judgement, education, media exposure, and the influence of my professional peers and friends. There are very few "facts" which we can establish on our own.
The earth is approximately a sphere is not something that I can personally observe to be an irrefutable fact (and many doubt it...). I hold my "belief" that it is round based on the collective "scientific" evidence from people I have learned to trust.
In the case of more complex issues such as "is renewable energy cheaper" one forms an opinion based on the "evidence" collected and presented by people one trusts. It appears that the deniers have a huge distrust of the establishment or anybody not of their view. They are then desperate to seek out and find likeminded rebels who support their distrust.
It is scary that I suspect some, perhaps many, of them are genuine in their beliefs. What elements of their education and experience lead them to trust the wrong people who would know.
That is not to say that I don't believe many have suspect motivations and know the real "facts" but choose to present another story. From the comments on their stuff, it is clear that they influence many and perpetuate the "bubble".
Wow! Two of my favorite communicators and thinkers in one place! Fantastic interview. Clarifying and bracing. Really appreciate the attention to communications and epistemology. Thank you.
So much to appreciate in this interview! Thank you both. It got a bit dark in the middle but I’m jazzed by the last 1/3 speculating about “epistemic anthropology.” I’ve obsessed for years about environmental messaging. Focusing on the upside is always best, for sure. And I agree with your insight not to lose sight of appeal of a good enemy. There are plenty of bad actors to skewer. I’m a big fan of humor, especially parody, to show their weakness.
I think you might want to consider the possibility that not all the very real epistemological problems with American education over the past decades are the fault of the Right. The Left has called for obedience rather than inquiry on a whole host of topics from racism to nutrition to medical advice to gender identity to economics. Yes, I think they tend to be more correct in most cases, most of the time. But when a charismatic authoritarian like Fauci proclaims "I am Science," it might be a warning sign that tribal obedience has replaced good faith argumentation in Blue states as well as Red.
Excellent article. Thanks for the huge effort it has taken to put it together.
I am in Australia watching with horror the collapse of many of the US core beliefs.
I have been playing Substack for a while as an author but have only recently been trying to engage through "notes" with other authors thoughts and beliefs.
Sadly, I have not been able to escape the "climate denial" people and have been foolish enough to engage with them in debate. Clearly a hopeless task as they cannot separate their belief systems from facts.
Turns out that I recognise this is a much bigger problem than I appreciated. I can see that for myself much of what I hold as "facts" are in fact "beliefs" based on my judgement, education, media exposure, and the influence of my professional peers and friends. There are very few "facts" which we can establish on our own.
The earth is approximately a sphere is not something that I can personally observe to be an irrefutable fact (and many doubt it...). I hold my "belief" that it is round based on the collective "scientific" evidence from people I have learned to trust.
In the case of more complex issues such as "is renewable energy cheaper" one forms an opinion based on the "evidence" collected and presented by people one trusts. It appears that the deniers have a huge distrust of the establishment or anybody not of their view. They are then desperate to seek out and find likeminded rebels who support their distrust.
It is scary that I suspect some, perhaps many, of them are genuine in their beliefs. What elements of their education and experience lead them to trust the wrong people who would know.
That is not to say that I don't believe many have suspect motivations and know the real "facts" but choose to present another story. From the comments on their stuff, it is clear that they influence many and perpetuate the "bubble".
Cheers
Great article! Thank you for being such a straight shooter Dr Volts!
Wow! Two of my favorite communicators and thinkers in one place! Fantastic interview. Clarifying and bracing. Really appreciate the attention to communications and epistemology. Thank you.
Thank you so much!!
So much to appreciate in this interview! Thank you both. It got a bit dark in the middle but I’m jazzed by the last 1/3 speculating about “epistemic anthropology.” I’ve obsessed for years about environmental messaging. Focusing on the upside is always best, for sure. And I agree with your insight not to lose sight of appeal of a good enemy. There are plenty of bad actors to skewer. I’m a big fan of humor, especially parody, to show their weakness.
Thank you!
Great article. Too bad the people that need to hear it won't read it.
I think you might want to consider the possibility that not all the very real epistemological problems with American education over the past decades are the fault of the Right. The Left has called for obedience rather than inquiry on a whole host of topics from racism to nutrition to medical advice to gender identity to economics. Yes, I think they tend to be more correct in most cases, most of the time. But when a charismatic authoritarian like Fauci proclaims "I am Science," it might be a warning sign that tribal obedience has replaced good faith argumentation in Blue states as well as Red.