What happened to News and Politrix

[Wahalla]

Re: What happened to News and Politrix

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tropicana</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Come to think of it cyan boddah. I remember how much abuse I used to put up with when I posted serious discussions. That's why now, when I do come around is pure foolishness I post. No one seems to have a problem with that. I guess I'd better stick with:

</div></div>

I got tired of seeing opnions being touted as fact, of insults being bandied about as enlighted political thought, of dogma being repeated as philosophy and Jamaicans being called dumb.

I simply stopped engaging with those who repeat it.

[RichD]

Re: What happened to News and Politrix

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Wahalla</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I got tired of seeing opnions being touted as fact, </div></div> still don't think some are clear o n that distinction...i wont give up though .....

[Tropicana]

Re: What happened to News and Politrix

So the consensus is....too much cass-cass?

[quodlibet]

Re: What happened to News and Politrix

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tropicana</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So the consensus is....too much cass-cass? </div></div>

I guess its a combination of people being convinced in their own political positions and views of history - and yes the cass cass play a part

[johnnycakes]

Re: What happened to News and Politrix

The Boston Globe is reporting on some results from studies that anyone who has had an argument off of or on the internet may already know.

Facts may not matter in an argument.

Yes, facts may not matter.

An argument is just as likely to be driven by psychological security rather than the facts.

People tend to accept “information” that best fits beliefs they already have, there is an endless amount of misinformation to choose from to reinforce any belief and that people will fight even more strongly to protect their egos when it begins looking like they are wrong.

This is even, and especially true where very strong evidence contradicting a person is presented to them.

Here are some interesting quotes from the article:

In a series of studies in 2005 and 2006, researchers at the University of Michigan found that when misinformed people, particularly political partisans, were exposed to corrected facts in news stories, they rarely changed their minds. In fact, they often became even more strongly set in their beliefs. Facts, they found, were not curing misinformation. Like an underpowered antibiotic, facts could actually make misinformation even stronger.

snip…

In reality, we often base our opinions on our beliefs, which can have an uneasy relationship with facts. And rather than facts driving beliefs, our beliefs can dictate the facts we chose to accept. They can cause us to twist facts so they fit better with our preconceived notions. Worst of all, they can lead us to uncritically accept bad information just because it reinforces our beliefs. This reinforcement makes us more confident we’re right, and even less likely to listen to any new information

snip…

And in the presence of the correct information, such people react very, very differently than the merely uninformed. Instead of changing their minds to reflect the correct information, they can entrench themselves even deeper.

snip…

“The general idea is that it’s absolutely threatening to admit you’re wrong,” says political scientist Brendan Nyhan, the lead researcher on the Michigan study. The phenomenon — known as “backfire” — is “a natural defense mechanism to avoid that cognitive dissonance.”

snip…

This effect is only heightened by the information glut, which offers — alongside an unprecedented amount of good information — endless rumors, misinformation, and questionable variations on the truth. In other words, it’s never been easier for people to be wrong, and at the same time feel more certain that they’re right.

snip…

On its own, this might not be a problem: People ignorant of the facts could simply choose not to vote. But instead, it appears that misinformed people often have some of the strongest political opinions

snip…

Part of the answer lies in the way our brains are wired. Generally, people tend to seek consistency. There is a substantial body of psychological research showing that people tend to interpret information with an eye toward reinforcing their preexisting views. If we believe something about the world, we are more likely to passively accept as truth any information that confirms our beliefs, and actively dismiss information that doesn’t. This is known as “motivated reasoning.”

snip …

But researchers are working on it. One avenue may involve self-esteem. Nyhan worked on one study in which he showed that people who were given a self-affirmation exercise were more likely to consider new information than people who had not. In other words, if you feel good about yourself, you’ll listen — and if you feel insecure or threatened, you won’t. This would also explain why demagogues benefit from keeping people agitated. The more threatened people feel, the less likely they are to listen to dissenting opinions, and the more easily controlled they are.

snip…

Even if people do accept the new information, it might not stick over the long term, or it may just have no effect on their opinions. In 2007 John Sides of George Washington University and Jack Citrin of the University of California at Berkeley studied whether providing misled people with correct information about the proportion of immigrants in the US population would affect their views on immigration. It did not.

snip …

A 2006 study by Charles Taber and Milton Lodge at Stony Brook University showed that politically sophisticated thinkers were even less open to new information than less sophisticated types. These people may be factually right about 90 percent of things, but their confidence makes it nearly impossible to correct the 10 percent on which they’re totally wrong. Taber and Lodge found this alarming, because engaged, sophisticated thinkers are “the very folks on whom democratic theory relies most heavily.”

[Gen]

Re: What happened to News and Politrix



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Wahalla</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tropicana</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Come to think of it cyan boddah. I remember how much abuse I used to put up with when I posted serious discussions. That's why now, when I do come around is pure foolishness I post. No one seems to have a problem with that. I guess I'd better stick with:

</div></div>

I got tired of seeing opnions being touted as fact, of insults being bandied about as enlighted political thought, of dogma being repeated as philosophy and Jamaicans being called dumb.

I simply stopped engaging with those who repeat it. </div></div>

[lonewolf]

Re: What happened to News and Politrix

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Facts may not matter in an argument.</div></div>

Oh no, here we go again...

[Q3210]

Re: What happened to News and Politrix

People behave here the same as they would in reality, meaning to say, opinions are already cast in stone, hardly are there those who are willing to be flexible, willing to be open minded.
It was fun...the politrix forum.

[Q3210]

Re: What happened to News and Politrix

Maybe the popular reality television shows got a hold on the likes of those who visited Politrix. Simply no time for tings lesser exciting.