Each advance of knowledge and narrative counts as one more step. However imperfect our understanding of the whole story, even a small amount of accurate knowledge outweighs many false beliefs.
Questions about police Read: http://t.co/CwpywJyxb9 — Steven Greffenius (@sgreffenius) January 3, 2015 Does intellectual dishonesty work? – Intellectual dishonesty appears …
It ought to make us angry when other people deceive us. I’m not talking about white lies. Those deceptions are part of everyday life. I’m talking about deceptions that matter. Call them black lies.
For both Dallas and 9/11, the feds produced a guilty party before they determined what happened. They said “Oswald” and “bin Laden” before they resolved basic questions about the crimes.
I believe Sunstein and other public information gatekeepers see themselves acting in service to their country, to protect the republic from actual threats and pernicious influence of conspiracy crackpots.
We still have our friends, we still have faith in ourselves, and most of all we can still reason effectively. Government can shut down a lot, but it can never shut down rational, free thought.
I decided way back when I wrote about Reagan that persuading people to change their minds about politics is not something I would ever try to do. It is like trying to change people’s minds about God or religion in general, another thing I never try to do.
Recognize these forms of dishonesty when you see them. With that recognition, you gain emotional resources to speak articulately when you encounter forceful people who practice these types of dishonesty. At a minimum, you can understand how their minds operate, and use that understanding to evaluate their arguments.
How did the feds make insurers pay such large amounts, when all information – from video cameras no less – pointed toward controlled demolition of the Twin Towers and WTC 7?
You may say, “Where’s the evidence you refer to frequently? I see a lot of good analysis here, but detailed …
Why would we expect a new government investigation to reach conclusions substantially different from the first one? We shouldn’t.
Conspiracy theorists regard themselves as skeptics. They see people who accept mainstream or official accounts as credulous. A mirror image …