@@darklight6921 Like a volley ball player being called the N-word in BYU? BYU is lying by the way, I was there. In fact, you can say that... I was at the heart of the story.
Pretty much. And it then gets even worse. Everything is a lie to them if it makes their guy look bad. Lost an election? The election must be rigged. Investigated for crimes? It's just biased government. Their guy can do no wrong, the other side is a cabal out to get their guy...
Also the thing with simple conspiracy theories and fake news too is it makes you feel like you are a deeper thinker. Without needing to put in the effort on source checking, and doing other facets to have an academic take on things. People sort of want to act like they are in the know, and be seen as an above average thinker. Without doing any of the real work involved to earn that credential.
I'd argue the opposite. The presence of conspiracy theories forces you to address various viewpoints within your own frame and answer them to maintain any sense intellectual rigor. Gish gallop aside, it is the standard bearer from Socrates onward: to answer your detractors with either evidence or firm reasoning: or maybe not be so resolute in your own proclamations.
@@quintessenceSL i think you have a point in stuff where you have a person really digging and going beyond simple comments. Like MK Ultra type conspiracies still take a lot of work and getting various sources to connect ideas. Some of the simple conspiracy theories, like the world is flat and pizza gate. They don t really do deep dives, they say very basic things that might have truth in maybe small portions. However, unlike a deep dive they clearly don't have enough rigor before making an absolute conclusion. I do agree with you though, a conspiracy theory is always a conspiracy theory until it unearths some truth and people pretend that it was general knowledge years later.
@@Blackjack09721 But even something like flat earthers- given their personal experience on earth, it is a perfectly reasonable position to take. And even for my own thoughts, I have to wonder if I don't hold some views equivalent to flat earthers based on my limited knowledge. It's a position more of sympathy than conspiracy. It's all the other buffoonery, from NASA pushing three dimensional geometry to nefarious ends, faked moon landings, or even a coherent explanation of the tides where the flat earthers go off the deep end with less than impressive results. And unfortunately until space travel becomes commonplace, and people see with their own eyes there is no great turtle shepherding us through the darkness, flat earthers are going to be part of the landscape and future recipients of darwin awards.
@@quintessenceSL You're not wrong but this shifting of the burden of proof onto the simpler, more reasonable assertions is intellectually tiresome and unfair on behalf of the person making those reasonable assertions. It'd be like if I said your mother was a hamster and when you replied that she's a human female, I asked you to prove it.
The thought distortion of Emotional Thinking: “it *feels* true so it must *be* true”. Not enough people have training in dealing with their own thoughts and emotions that drive them.
It's also related to this interesting phenomenon where people think impactful/impressive events must have some complicated, equally intricate cause. It's why you get people that believe aliens built the pyramids instead of just some really determined, hardworking people. I forget the name of it (clearly), but it's just the inverse of Occam's Razor.
@@nuke___8876 but they had like the entire fucking Egyptian workforce on the pyramids and they were as smart as we were it would be surprising if they didn't find clever ways to build it
@@notaburneraccount Yeah, the point is to notice the emotions and work through/with them. Not believe we are above them. Also the people that don’t really feel emotions in a neurotypical way are much more easily sociopathic
From wrestling, to jerry springer, to mega churches, judge judy.. etc etc.. Americans have always loved bullshit. Let's face it. Reality is less appealing. Everything has to be a show. Bullshit is as old as humanity is.
Watching American evening news is kind of weird, everything has to have flashy visuals, popular rock / pop music and sound effects, and for some reason just about every newscaster offers their opinion and unnecessary side quips and remarks.
Something I notice is that people in general do not like to question their existence and purpose, therefor they come up with a quick answer. It is so hard for anyone to answer, "I don't know." What comes after that answer is much more difficult, being ok with not knowing. With more advance ways of being bombarded with information, one can feel the need to want to know. This will cause anxious feelings.
Because there's a difference between Truth & Fact. Facts are things that exist whether you like them or not. Like the Sky being Blue, Chameleons change color, etc. There are different kinds of Truth. Objective Truths, Mystical truths, socially pragmatic Truths, Opinions, etc.
this is both an interesting set of ideas but also the nature of language. we can assume we understand what is being said but words can be abused and misused by disingenuous actors and people can get caught up in interesting ideas that were started by people only meaning to distract them with something meant to absorb them with mental cobwebs. truth doesn't exist is a toy that can be armed to whatever dogma the speaker might intend. there is reality as such and it isn't right to cheapen life in the pursuit of misanthropy. that's just a theory... a game theory.
@@williamw3501 you obviously didn't nor did you actually bother to understand my comment. So here's an easier statement. "People can have their own truth, but not their own facts."
@@marksalmoneussorcerersupreme The definition of a lie is a untruthful assertion. Key word there is truth. If what he says is his "own truth" on what standard is that wrong? 🤔 if in fact truth is a separate concept and independent concept of truth.
You're channel is fantastic. This summarizes an hour lecture I've been teaching since 2015 (shift of "reliable", limited media to anything-goes), and serves as a fantastic reinforcement tool for my students (high school seniors).
Watching this video reminded me about a interesting quote from a rebellious and ground breaking comedian. “When you’re born you get a ticket to the freak show. When you’re born in America, you get a front row seat.” George Carlin
wisecrack has been on fire lately! for all the doom and gloom from the trajectory of our consumerism societies, there's still some top quality education to be found in channels like this
It’s like MAGA and Qanon are smart enough to be skeptical of information but then just mainline alternative information without the same level of skepticism smh
'MAGA and Qanon are smart enough to be sceptical of information' By believing that democrats are baby eating lizard people... yeah very sceptical LOL. I have never seen more gullible idiots in my life.
It is the same on the Left (I'm a centrist). How many of them believe that trump was involved with Russia before the 2016 election? How many believe that trump sold classified documents from Mara-Lago? I could go on and on about false believes from misinformation from the Left, the biggest outlet being MSNBC. (I used to watch it regularly until I noticed that Maddow was reporting stories constantly based on only one source. (Something not covered here about journalism is the golden rule is that you must have 2 sources and both sources have to be checked by a 2nd party before it can be reported). It should also be noted that the DailyShow when first started by Jon Stewart was very popular and many people began watching it for their main news source because it mocked the news, but in doing so left reporting news as pretty straight forward. (Reminds me of a story during the 6 Day war in the Middle East. Egypt reported they were bombed by Israeli jets and Israel reported their jets never left the base. All of the Western media reported the story just like that. No one went to actually try to verify the story, which we get a lot of today.)
As a genX, I am really trying my best not to fall into being a boomer.... I'm going to be clueless and out of touch no matter what I do, I just don't want to be proud and problematic about it.
@@avacadomangobanana2588 lol, people in authority have the greatest incentive to use misinformation for profit and gain. That isn't capitalism, its fascism.
What you said about us being used to being lied to is, to me, the root of every issue you stated. We live in a society of distrust, and folk are taking advantage of that. The sad part is that I don’t see it getting better.
personal opinion 1)The human brain often give more reward chemicals for useful data then factual data. Useful data needs to conform to social usage. 2)The reason why gossip travels so fast is because gossip doesn't create new data, just new connections to already collected representations. Understanding new ways for new representations to operate needs additional time to learn. most conspiracy = cheap gossip endorphins
The most influential book of my entire life I read when I was 13... After picking it up at my libraries book sale for 10 cents... Neil Postman's "Amusing ourselves to Death"... I'm a first generation millioninal... I was their when social media was birthed... And because of that book I have and still do avoid it like the plague... I saw the damage and danger well before most people even knew what a Chatroom or posting on social media was... I was avoiding social media before the first anything even went viral... I saw what the treat that it posed at 13... I'm 40 now... And experts are just now just starting to assess the harm its causing... let alone fight it... or even what to do to help those harmed by it... Many have warned all of us well before the danger starts in the disaster often decades in advance... And we're always treated like we're telling you the sky is fallin... And unfortunately one ever seems to realize until its too late... And they're being crushed to death by the sky...
Tbh I'd argue that a core problem is that we've moved away from the notion of the burden of proof falling on the accuser. At least to me it feels increasingly common for news to spread itself without providing sources that fuelled the article to begin with. In a sense, one could argue that even videos like this are guilty of the same thing. It is impossible to expect people, especially working adults, to spend what free time they have searching online for information regarding a one-off video or comment they found online and how factually correct that video or comment is. As a result we're inevitably left with personal account / experience and how well the video or comment resonates with our experience as a method of fact-checking, inaccurate as it will likely be. The only thing we can do and should do is remain humble and acknowledge our lack of understanding in the topic and avoid aiding the spread of the information we read if we don't comprehend it. Even if not everyone check the sources of articles they read it is still important for the sources to be there because it makes it easier for others to call out inaccuracies when the article eventually spreads. When sources aren't easy to come by most people are never going to bother arguing about it because fact-checking it yourself simply consumes too much time. I feel like this might be a particular catalyst when it comes to fuelling ignorance in the US due to the amount of free time people having being generally more varied, with some working 12+ hours every day and have little choice but to accept what is fed to them. Of course, societal trust is an important detail as well. If you're from the US but have never been to Europe you have no idea if Europe actually exists. You're relying entirely on your common sense and what you were taught in school to remain confident in the belief that Europe definitely exists and when trust in society is low, more and more people are willing to be far more paranoid about which things they were taught in school is real and what isn't, further fuelling a anarchistic mindset where the only one you can truly believe is yourself. The world can certainly be a wacky place.
All I use are Reuters, AP, and two local news sites for news. No feeds, no social media. This seems about right. Also, as GenX, I get memes. Because the internet exists and I have access to it.
Reuters regularly collaborates with the CIA and it gets large amounts of funding from the UK government in the 70s. Now they switched to getting funding by the Reuters Foundation... which is funded by various western governments, simply making the state funding a step removed from the spotlight. You are limiting your reading to literal state propaganda to empower a liberal viewpoint (liberal as in liberalism, not as in DNC/"progressive")
Thanks to Keeps for sponsoring this video! Head to keeps.com/wisecrack to get 50% off your first order of Keeps hair loss treatment. If you find yourself wondering "But why don't they talk about CNN?" it's because we already made a video on that! ruclips.net/video/YRkkkxZZpAc/видео.html
It's not the truth that's breaking down. It's our collective willingness to believe the truth that's breaking down. Our bleak reality has caused us to cling to comforting statements, regardless of whether they're true. This clinging is making society worse, resulting in a positive feedback loop.
No video is more important now then that one here. It is shapping politics and society. After all, how is it possible to talk about anything without at least some common ground to begin with? Without truth, anyone can lie about how the suffering of others is needed, and how fights, not words, should decide who will suffer. My bet. The periodic (could be sai, dialetic) swing between individualism and coletivism.
The way I've been looking at it... What is fact and what is feeling doesn't matter. In a day and age where every person can immediately tweet their thoughts on a news story in which all they know is a sensationalized headline, what matters is who has the best hot-take, who's hot-take was seen best both in the present moment and who's hot-take has aged well. This is why we have double-down culture, reassuring your hot-take is the correct one just too early in history, or how moving-the-goalpost becomes an incredibly delicate artform. Our feelings don't care about anyone's facts because we don't live in objectivity, we live in subjectivity and no one has the right to tell someone their life is wrong - or so that's how i see the thinking going.
In his defense even though he is very troubled... the frog thing "even though horribly generalized by him", chemical dumping was damaging the hormonal systems of the frogs in a nearby river/lake causing many frogs to act like their female counterpart.
You know, while his frog statement is humorously strange, endocrine disruption and environmental contamination - even in the first world - are serious issues. In addition to diet and a sedentary lifestyle, the accumulation of chemicals was listed as a culprit of the “dramatic” rise in cancer in people under age 50 in a recent study.
It’s easy to mix something real with something absurd. So there were “gay frogs” but that it is a natural phenomenon to combat overpopulation wouldn’t fly with his audience. So he took the very real threat we all face being exposed to multiple chemicals. An unnatural thing.Mixed it with natures remedy for overpopulation. Just so he is able to continue to spread hatred against the lgbtq community. To label it as unnatural. You’d think most people would see through it but of course not. They go with what they want to believe in order to justify their bigotry. I know I basically repeated what you just said but for the maybe one person that will say oh to this and end their bigotry … it’s worth it
Yup especially when they used a certain plasticizer to help make bottles less brittle, although this was changed I found trace amounts running a sample of a few water bottles plastic made after 2016 through a gcms.
Our age old problem still persists, we judge things in in two different extremes,either you side with side or the other, in case one is not positioned in either side, they are bombarded with exaggerated information leaving the person confused.
There's two big pivot points in how disinformation spread in American media: 4:44 The loss of the Fairness Doctrine lost the need to give time to make counterarguments pushed forward information silos where the need to verify claims became moot. 8:35 The allowance of opinion as news with the understanding that the people could tell the difference opened us to the point that most people couldn't tell the difference.
Glad to see you guys have hit 3M subscribers! I took philosophy in college so I've enjoyed your channel very much, since you had (circa) 1.5M. Love you guys; keep up the hard work!
@@WisecrackEDU I can understand memes you fu.king loser! Gen X also does not care about your little memes! We stand with Gen z who are also real tired of millennials!
There's also the matter of cognitive dissonance. It's a human thing to believe in reinforcing information and rejecting contradictory of the same. It's often more comforting to embrace an incredible lie than confront a jarring truth.
This video did indeed give me real information. Sometimes I think I know most everything about a topic before I click a video but I'm proven wrong like 90% of the time. Funny how that works -- have to wonder if other people are falling into the same trap
I love how there is always a dualist language with tech companies: Conspiracy theories are what people want to click on, so 'Facebook rewards the sharing of fake news!' It is such an obvious attempt to redefine what people enjoy with some 'algorithm which evil tech has created'. We want to keep our purity and have our Facebook too.
I'm agreeing with you but also weak-minded people like my father just want to believe anything that makes them feel good and not think about all the horrible things in the world. So they cope by thinking about all the horrible things in the world and blaming them on whomever they think deserves it. It makes sense if you don't think about it and they definitely don't.
Fake news is FAR more profitable for companies like that. They get substantially more clicks from them. The Social Dilemma is an amazing documentary and I highly recommend it to everyone. I deleted my IG and FB after watching it and my happiness level increased dramatically.
That's nothing new either. When Armstrong stepped onto the moon, it was "a great achievement of mankind". And when people talk about anything these days that's "good" or "an improvement", it's always an achievement of mankind, rather than that of the handful of minds that actually created computers for example, or planes and flight. When Hitler did a genocide, it was all the fault of Hitler and the Nazis, rather than a failure of mankind as a whole. "Look what WE achieved" vs "look what he/she/they destroyed". Even look at animals vs humans. When animals do cute and/or preferential things, we anthropomorphize the behaviors. When humans do bad, we call them animals. "My dog is a people!" and "fur babies" vs "Hitler was an animal" or "that rabid murderer", etc. Base anger and other "negative" behaviors are "animalistic", good behaviors are human.
@@grimmfromnz They've all become crazy conspiracy theorists. It's just really sad that there are any people out there at all who can listen to that man for more than 2 minutes and not be able to tell how massively stupid he is.
@@ForAnAngel I mean being fair to jones a large portion of what he discusses comes into fruition and if people follow him and he's right about something then they think oh ok what's next yk but yeah I know what you mean it can be so tiring listen to conspiracy that and disinformation this.
I jokingly say "I blame Descartes" for this, but jokes aside I think there's something about how western philosophical thought put "logic/rational" thought on a pedestal and marked all "feelings/emotions" as suspect and weak. Which also got adopted into why women are branded as emotional and unable to be strong/lead/innovate/etc. The result of this context is that people are rarely taught or learn to integrate their emotions into their being. But we aren’t robots, and our emotions do influence us in terms of our decision making processes and even of what we perceive. We are often not rational creatures so much as rationalizing creatures. And the more we ignore and discount our emotions and don't integrate ourselves as a whole being of emotions, feelings, and thought, then the more at the effect of our emotions we can become, without even realizing it. By pretending we're not swayed by our emotions we become blind to how we are, indeed, being swayed by them. If and when we engage with ourselves in a whole manner (emotions, feelings, and thoughts) we get to embrace the signals emotions give us without becoming them, and without being used by them. We can instead include and merge them with our active mindfulness to give us presence from which we can then choose. Agency becomes ours and, as a bonus, we get to enjoy the glorious experience(s) of being alive and the vast catalogue of feelings and emotions. :)
Philosophers of both east and west and male and female are primarily concerned with truth and wisdom, not so much thought and emotion which are rather less useful terms being overly vague when discussing the range of topics that philosophy deals with. Of course those are relevant and Descartes and many philosophers are deeply aware of both the enervating and distorting tendencies of emotional and other kinds of bias. From dread to agape and every emotion in between including raw power lust all have been analyzed and carefully accounted for when philosophers of east or west endeavor to discover the universal amidst endless perspectives and distractions. Appreciate your comment. Just offering my feedback for what its worth.
@@markyarbrough5511 Yes indeed! Most (all?) well developed philosophical traditions and inquiries begin with developing being present and getting grounded in what's so. Even Yoda speaks of it in the Empire Strikes Back. :D That allows us to distinguish what's so around us from our emotions, as well as distinguishing thoughting vs thinking. I only warn against then becoming fixated on any side of the coin, whether it's what's so, our emotions, feelings, sensations, thoughts, thinking, logic, or etc. How they are all part of us and how they interplay is where we begin to discover those universalities that make our human beingness. :)
The human brain is a pattern seeking machine. Much of the happenings in the world don't have complex causes. Conspiracy theories often create signals from noise and satisfy that itch for deeper meaning behind events, even if it requires potentially conflicting beliefs.
A criticism of this channel seems to be be that they have a hard time qualifying things and it can make different times feel more ideal or destroy some nuance. I think a big part of it is the constraints of the format not allowing you to make a 18ish minute video that covers everything and ignores bias and be entertaining.
Over the long term I truly find it hard to imagine any substantial subsect of my peers (millennials actively involved in keeping up with events) reaching the point of disillusion and spite that is being broadcast from news sources at either extreme but every group has outliers and those individuals tend to not only be the loudest but also the most abrasive. It's sad when basic rational logic in approaching differing viewpoints seems to be in such low supply.
This seemed somewhat inconsistent. If truth is relative, why would "All truths" have something in common; like equality? How did this get tacked on as a requirement for "Truth"?
Scrubbing of language? Language is not some static thing that remains permanent for ever. It’s a living thing that evolves over time. If you went back in time just 300 years you’d barely understand what people would say to you.
@@LoveStrangeDr language does evolve naturally over time. What has been happening over the past decade is the official definition of specific words changed immediately when the current meaning is inconvenient to those in power. The word vaccine comes to mind ;)
@@guillermoelnino there is irony in what you say. The fact that you can freely share that information with me should inconvenience the all knowing all powerful big bad government eh?
Evryone in human worls needs a certain amount of lies in their life , majority of it is self deception and will full ignorance . Like that guy who work his ass of to get a manager rank , constantly ignoring the amount of pressure he will be under . He only dreams of the good outcome of his work . The truth is life doesnt get as good as we predict it to be . But sometimes life get better bcz of random reasons . Enter the next thing we ignore , the fact that life is way more random than we give it credit . We talk about money vs power vs talent vs popularity , while willfully ignoring how random can things be .
Emotions are probably the biggest driver in hate, ignorance, and violence. I like to think of emotions as alarm bells signalling me to think deeper about WHY I'm feeling that way, rather than an invitation to act on said emotions.
It's a problem believing what's probable, the more you find out what politicians, governments, and corporations are capable of. Like a trump, Monsanto, operation Northwoods ect.
I think there was this jester who survived the fear of being beheaded by king Louis XIV by making fart jokes. Farting was universal and and obsured enough to mention in polite society that he kind of paved the way for comedy to survive.
In 1997 you'd AltaVista "Clinton is a lizard" and find a bunch of Geocities pages. A lot of those would have that smoking skull gif and a midi version of the X-Files theme
I'm guessing back when the things being reported didn't have a political slant or didn't seem to, anyways. Like when I was a kid growing up, local news didn't feel like it had a political side to it.
@@poterror Bias always has and always will exist in all news. The best you can do is look for news that is honest about that bias. It exists in everything from what they report on to how they report on it, what facts they include, what parts they embellish, etc.
@@poterror It didn't feel like it had a political slant, because it has the same politics as you. Local news is very reactionary. Talking about the threat of crime, anti labour organizing, pro police etc.
Hi. Every week you give the world a free lesson on ethics and psychology and sociology and countless other topics. Your information checks out, but that pales in comparison to the overall positive effect your videos bring. In an ever increasing insane world, you provide about 20 minutes a week to explain complex things to slightly lesser intelligent people like me. You could be a liar with a malicious intention but I really doubt it. Just know, there are people who give great value to your videos. I am one of them.
I'd also add that there's a toddler-like reaction to things people like/disliake vs. things that are real. There are tons of examples, but the most interesting ones are the ones that are on the subjective side because some people have this idea that subjectivity isn't real. Except that your experiences are 100% real. Look at many kinds of phobias -- for example, lepidopterophobia (fear of butterflies or moths). The danger butterflies pose is not real but some people's fears definitely are. An even more interesting example is when people say they like/dislike something, but in reality, they experience the opposite. SNL had a funny sketch where people were shocked when they found out the song they were humming and dancing to was a Taylor Swift song. Presumably because they are not the type of person that is supposed to like Taylor Swift. Clip is here: ruclips.net/video/PAhAz7JU0dg/видео.html
I think what makes it hard for people to accept the truths of the world is that they're not nearly as emotionally pulling cuz you know when you go back to religion gods and demons brawling it out in the heavens is a lot cooler than hey storms happen because water evaporates out of bodies of water into the sky they collect together into a cloud and then eventually that cloud gets too dense which causes gravity pulls down on it. I find it interesting but I'm a big nerd so yeah
Yeah, they believe what they want, and convince themselves it’s the truth by seeing signs or whatever. It is cool, but damn if you can’t become a millionaire quick by exploiting the faithful elderly.
@@CChissel All religion/seudoscience in a nutshell Scientists & Skeptics: Why don't you back it up with source?! Religious leaders/ pseudoscientists: My source is that I made it the fuck up!
I always thought of it as that as well. As much of as I love learning about mythical gods and creature. These are characters in literature then anything.
The other issue, is that when things are verifiable truth, they are often debunked immediately by the usual crowd because they don't meet their political bias. "If a lie is only printed often enough, it becomes a quasi-truth, and if such a truth is repeated often enough, it becomes an article of belief, a dogma, and men will die for it." From The Crown of a Life (1869) by Isa Blagden
What good is "truth" if that basic human instinct of empathy isn't employed? Our fundamental flaw is that...we're flawed. We do not perceive reality as it actually is, but as our brains interpret. So, GI/GO. We react poorly to what an already flawed understanding of what IS. If every engagement with others involved and rested upon empathy as a cornerstone instead of an afterthought application, collective understanding would refine "truth" collectively felt to much greater effect than trying to navigate that concept wholly alone. I don't think sharing an experience is ALWAYS beneficial with every person; some people revel in their misunderstanding of reality. But, as a go-to instead of the converse with the average interaction with others, I can't help but feel that this would progress instead of stymie human understanding.
So many people don’t understand that. We aren’t seeing reality as it is, only what our brains can interpret with our senses, and they are quite limited. I agree with the rest of what you’ve said here. You can never really understand someone without empathy, we can’t be simplified down to a binary and fit in a neat box of labels or impressions.
It's overload of information, we've been blasted with information for years that its become overwhelming and now people are kinda done and so will stick to their truths rather than actual truths
Is anyone disturbed by the guy discussing truth while shilling for “save your hair” bullsnot? Not to mention the incongruity of a dude always in a ball cap claiming a company can give you luscious locks? What a way to pay the bills… smh
Don't hate the player, hate the game. Also it's pretty funny to sit there criticizing someone for making high quality content for your entertainment that's literally FREE to you because of sponsors.
I'm 54 years old. I grew up obviously at a time when there was no Internet (only bulletin boards in the early 1980's). I don't know whether, if I was a teen or in my twenties now, I would fall for any of the blatant tactics and emotional rhetoric, but while it is widespread, it still usually is unsophisticated. So there's still not an excuse to avoid personal responsibility and to fail to prioritise self-awareness............I'm joking. There never was any real social education in self-awareness and objectivity. It's just that the technology now exists to allow a consumer market for self-validation, confirmation of biases and to indulge every kind of lazy end run to feeling self-important.
Some people are open to any possibility, and honestly examine ALL evidence in a rational manner to come to a conclusion, followed by a moral evaluation. Others start with a desire for a specific moral evaluation, and work backwards assembling any fact that supports them, and dismissing any fact that does not.
even if we the public are a little too obsessed with fake news it doesn't help when those in power are all to happy if not eager to affirm our biases for their own gains as opposed to ours food for thought....
Omg...the gay frogs made me about choke on my lunch as i was listening to this. Lol how have I missed that "gem." Jesus wept, man, take a breath, drink some water and go sleep off the coke. 😆
So for once I comment on your question at the end of your videos asking, "is our society too fracture to ever agree on anything ever again?" Who is to say it ever was Micheal? It's probably more American to be as fractured and disagree on things and fake news just being apart of all that. Online social media has just brought all of that closer to forefront than ever before.
I think it is safe to say our country at various points was much less fractured than it is now. People always disagree on things, that’s normal, but there were far far more “moderates” in times past. People who for better or worse sought a middle ground, a compromise. These days the Republicans and Democrats are basically an angry married couple that only fight and want a divorce.
True, there was fake news back in the late 1700s and early 1800s. But, on the disagreements, it’s different now. Most happen online usually in anonymity. I believe it’s gotten worse now than it ever has, because it’s bled into the real world, where they end up giving these faceless voices a face, even if it is the wrong one. And may possibly assault them or something, just because they say something similar or in line with what they’ve argued with people online. I think people are being seen less as individuals because of this, the by product being less motivation to try and listen to someone and understand them. Of course I could just be thinking it’s a new thing when in reality it hasn’t changed like fake news hasn’t. Whatever.
@@CChissel part of it is tribalism. Part of it is human nature. We like labeling things and putting them in neat boxes. We like labelling ourselves even, as a sense of identity. Especially nowadays a LOT of marginalized groups have various labels that they feel are deeply tied to their identity and who they are as a person. So when they feel being “liberal” or “conservative” is a core part of what makes them a person… they get super defensive or even aggressive because they are defending what makes them… them. Beliefs and political associations are more than ever a fundamental part of who you are. Partly because certain human rights and groups are harmed along party lines. I’d bet anything gay people feel generally disenfranchised and attacked by conservative Christians. And conversely I’d wager that wealthy people feel attacked by socialist liberals. Once you align yourself with one group, you make intrinsically enemies of the other with no room for nuance or… humanity/individuality.
There just needs to be a legal punishment for disseminating false information. I'm not qualified to decide it, since my first choice would be to just remove the vocal cords from people like Alex Jones, but there does need to be something.
As a power-hungry megalomaniac, I also would like the ability to severely punish those who spread false information, as long as me and my buddies get to decide what "false" means.
@@AJX-2 I specifically said I am not qualified to decide. And it's not about trying to spread some subjective perception of truth as it is about preventing widespread harm from the spread of factually incorrect information, like news channels mislabeling a 2 year old joke video as a food challenge and giving it much more widespread awareness in such a way as to prevent people realizing it's a joke.
I think the question is less about if humans can believe in universal truths, because everyone shares universal truths(the sky is blue, smoking kills.) weather or not people want to believe the truth is an individual’s prerogative. The real question is, who is going to be the arbiter of truth? As in, can there be a source of truth for the world and would that arbiter be able to provide truth without bias and how does it deal with conflicting truths.
Before even watching this video I can say it’s because of inequality. In any given population if there’s a crazy disparity of income amongst the rich and poor crazy beliefs will emerge
Why the music?? You don’t need back music… it is unnecessary stimulation and distracts from your message. Ugh it’s giving me anxiety… lol Can’t get through it. But I’m sure you made a great point 👍👍 3:08
Without the fairness doctrine holding journalism to some form of standard, the industry has no incentive to report acutely or impartially. The line between news and propaganda has vanished.
I used to be a borderline free speech absolutist, because I thought that an unrestricted marketplace of ideas would lead to reason coming out on top. I no longer believe that. We need some regulations in place because no one benefits from the onslaught of blatant lies.
@@thearomanticshipper4468 so what's to stop a far right authority controlling your speech when they take power? If you grant that power to a democratic regime now; that pendulum will swing back the other way. Kinda like when Germany took away guns. That happened before hitler; what's the worst that can happen right? 🤔
Objective truths exist as long as one is willing to establish that their individual view is not an absolute truth. If one cannot acknowledge the faults of their own eyes, they will never be able to truly see. Our world is constantly in flux, and to ignore that because it conflicts with our "idealized" view of absolute truth is to be willfully blind. We need the trust of one another in order to see the world in each other's eyes, and to acknowledge we cannot see the world as it truly is without that trust.
...but can we also talk about how on both sides there's been proven lies? It's hard to trust if you are constantly just being fed someone else's interest dressed as "news". There seems to be a global distrust of the "regular media" coming from someone living in the Caribbean (DR).
I agree but the solution taken by most people is consume "alternative" media outlets which tend to be more biased and profit-oriented. If anything, people are so distrustful because they haven't sharpened their critical thinking skills. It's good to be moderately skeptical, and assess information based on that skepticism
Makes good, thoughtful analysis on miniformation, disinformation and that means for truth and capitalism 👍 Then tries to sell you bogus hair products 👎
![BRASIL vs. PERÚ [4-0] | RESUMEN | ELIMINATORIAS SUDAMERICANAS | FECHA 10](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/tbyOJKXfQnI/mqdefault.jpg)
Remember when "I reject your reality and substitute my own?" was meant as an ironic joke?
Good times, good times...
it always starts as a joke.
@@darklight6921 no it doesn't, shut the fuck up
@@darklight6921 Like a volley ball player being called the N-word in BYU?
BYU is lying by the way, I was there. In fact, you can say that... I was at the heart of the story.
@@jasonbelstone3427 What the fuck are you talking abouf
I remember that, I thought it was facetious back then.
Now in hindsight I know it was.
It seems that to some people now, the truth doesn’t matter anymore. Instead it’s more like “it’s true because I like it or it fits my beliefs.”
Pretty much. And it then gets even worse. Everything is a lie to them if it makes their guy look bad. Lost an election? The election must be rigged. Investigated for crimes? It's just biased government. Their guy can do no wrong, the other side is a cabal out to get their guy...
Wow wow amazing.. Are you vaccinated?
Always has been
@@Sp1n1985 besides the point
@@robpatershuk wow wow amazing who told you it was besides the point? Do you feel safe?
Also the thing with simple conspiracy theories and fake news too is it makes you feel like you are a deeper thinker. Without needing to put in the effort on source checking, and doing other facets to have an academic take on things.
People sort of want to act like they are in the know, and be seen as an above average thinker. Without doing any of the real work involved to earn that credential.
Source?
I'd argue the opposite.
The presence of conspiracy theories forces you to address various viewpoints within your own frame and answer them to maintain any sense intellectual rigor.
Gish gallop aside, it is the standard bearer from Socrates onward: to answer your detractors with either evidence or firm reasoning: or maybe not be so resolute in your own proclamations.
@@quintessenceSL i think you have a point in stuff where you have a person really digging and going beyond simple comments. Like MK Ultra type conspiracies still take a lot of work and getting various sources to connect ideas.
Some of the simple conspiracy theories, like the world is flat and pizza gate. They don t really do deep dives, they say very basic things that might have truth in maybe small portions. However, unlike a deep dive they clearly don't have enough rigor before making an absolute conclusion.
I do agree with you though, a conspiracy theory is always a conspiracy theory until it unearths some truth and people pretend that it was general knowledge years later.
@@Blackjack09721 But even something like flat earthers- given their personal experience on earth, it is a perfectly reasonable position to take. And even for my own thoughts, I have to wonder if I don't hold some views equivalent to flat earthers based on my limited knowledge. It's a position more of sympathy than conspiracy.
It's all the other buffoonery, from NASA pushing three dimensional geometry to nefarious ends, faked moon landings, or even a coherent explanation of the tides where the flat earthers go off the deep end with less than impressive results.
And unfortunately until space travel becomes commonplace, and people see with their own eyes there is no great turtle shepherding us through the darkness, flat earthers are going to be part of the landscape and future recipients of darwin awards.
@@quintessenceSL You're not wrong but this shifting of the burden of proof onto the simpler, more reasonable assertions is intellectually tiresome and unfair on behalf of the person making those reasonable assertions.
It'd be like if I said your mother was a hamster and when you replied that she's a human female, I asked you to prove it.
The thought distortion of Emotional Thinking: “it *feels* true so it must *be* true”. Not enough people have training in dealing with their own thoughts and emotions that drive them.
It's also related to this interesting phenomenon where people think impactful/impressive events must have some complicated, equally intricate cause. It's why you get people that believe aliens built the pyramids instead of just some really determined, hardworking people.
I forget the name of it (clearly), but it's just the inverse of Occam's Razor.
@@nuke___8876 in medicine we call it Hickam’s Dictum: “A patient can have as many diseases as he damn well pleases.”
@@nuke___8876 but they had like the entire fucking Egyptian workforce on the pyramids and they were as smart as we were
it would be surprising if they didn't find clever ways to build it
I'd say that people who think they're logical and aren't "tainted" by their emotions are some of the most concerning individuals.
@@notaburneraccount Yeah, the point is to notice the emotions and work through/with them. Not believe we are above them. Also the people that don’t really feel emotions in a neurotypical way are much more easily sociopathic
From wrestling, to jerry springer, to mega churches, judge judy.. etc etc.. Americans have always loved bullshit. Let's face it. Reality is less appealing. Everything has to be a show. Bullshit is as old as humanity is.
Don't forget the COvid scam.
Watching American evening news is kind of weird,
everything has to have flashy visuals,
popular rock / pop music and sound effects,
and for some reason just about every newscaster offers their opinion and unnecessary side quips and remarks.
@@niagarawarrior9623 Its about feeling like the smartest person in any given room. Even, and especially if, you don't know what you're talking about.
Idk how I feel about wrestling being in the same category as the others in that list
@@JustJulyo Why not?
Something I notice is that people in general do not like to question their existence and purpose, therefor they come up with a quick answer. It is so hard for anyone to answer, "I don't know." What comes after that answer is much more difficult, being ok with not knowing.
With more advance ways of being bombarded with information, one can feel the need to want to know. This will cause anxious feelings.
When we die, we die. There is no afterlife.
The problem with playing people's emotions is eventually people act on those emotions - violently.
yup. BLM is the greatest example of that
@@SPACEDOUT19 huh?
@@CChissel whats the problem there buddy?
@@CChissel BLM reacts violently thats what he said.
@@SPACEDOUT19 what did blm do? I’m confused why you brought them up.
“Truth doesn’t exist” is a very interesting statement because it is itself an assertion of truth.
Because there's a difference between Truth & Fact.
Facts are things that exist whether you like them or not. Like the Sky being Blue, Chameleons change color, etc.
There are different kinds of Truth. Objective Truths, Mystical truths, socially pragmatic Truths, Opinions, etc.
this is both an interesting set of ideas but also the nature of language. we can assume we understand what is being said but words can be abused and misused by disingenuous actors and people can get caught up in interesting ideas that were started by people only meaning to distract them with something meant to absorb them with mental cobwebs. truth doesn't exist is a toy that can be armed to whatever dogma the speaker might intend. there is reality as such and it isn't right to cheapen life in the pursuit of misanthropy. that's just a theory... a game theory.
@@marksalmoneussorcerersupreme so Trump/ the right wing extremist aren't lying? There just telling there truth, got it.
@@williamw3501 you obviously didn't nor did you actually bother to understand my comment. So here's an easier statement. "People can have their own truth, but not their own facts."
@@marksalmoneussorcerersupreme
The definition of a lie is a untruthful assertion. Key word there is truth. If what he says is his "own truth" on what standard is that wrong? 🤔 if in fact truth is a separate concept and independent concept of truth.
You're channel is fantastic. This summarizes an hour lecture I've been teaching since 2015 (shift of "reliable", limited media to anything-goes), and serves as a fantastic reinforcement tool for my students (high school seniors).
The problem is often times the one's calling others "fake news" are the one's promulgating it.
that is the tragedy of the disinforming affecting the misinformed :(
you want to know who's spewing fake news? see who attacks you if you say the opposite is true.
Trump.
I’m waiting for the day when he says “I’ve been using keeps everyday and *removes hat and luscious locks flow out*”
you and me both . . . you and me both.
Watching this video reminded me about a interesting quote from a rebellious and ground breaking comedian. “When you’re born you get a ticket to the freak show. When you’re born in America, you get a front row seat.” George Carlin
wisecrack has been on fire lately! for all the doom and gloom from the trajectory of our consumerism societies, there's still some top quality education to be found in channels like this
It’s like MAGA and Qanon are smart enough to be skeptical of information but then just mainline alternative information without the same level of skepticism smh
'MAGA and Qanon are smart enough to be sceptical of information' By believing that democrats are baby eating lizard people... yeah very sceptical LOL. I have never seen more gullible idiots in my life.
It is the same on the Left (I'm a centrist). How many of them believe that trump was involved with Russia before the 2016 election? How many believe that trump sold classified documents from Mara-Lago? I could go on and on about false believes from misinformation from the Left, the biggest outlet being MSNBC. (I used to watch it regularly until I noticed that Maddow was reporting stories constantly based on only one source. (Something not covered here about journalism is the golden rule is that you must have 2 sources and both sources have to be checked by a 2nd party before it can be reported).
It should also be noted that the DailyShow when first started by Jon Stewart was very popular and many people began watching it for their main news source because it mocked the news, but in doing so left reporting news as pretty straight forward. (Reminds me of a story during the 6 Day war in the Middle East. Egypt reported they were bombed by Israeli jets and Israel reported their jets never left the base. All of the Western media reported the story just like that. No one went to actually try to verify the story, which we get a lot of today.)
As a genX, I am really trying my best not to fall into being a boomer.... I'm going to be clueless and out of touch no matter what I do, I just don't want to be proud and problematic about it.
I'm sure alot of us have an uncle/cousin/whatever whom we would like to have that attitude
We were mentioned!
The world needs more like you
Millennial here. Middle ground I suppose. I can’t say if you are but I can say there are a good chunk of genx that are proud and problematic about it.
Honestly can't say I've seen a difference in generation. We will all be old men yelling at clouds to younger folks
Easiest answer ever: its money, its always money. The lies and misinformation are for financial gain.
Capitalism. We value money over people. And we getting exactly that.
@@avacadomangobanana2588 brilliant answer if you are three years old. If not, then you need help.
@@avacadomangobanana2588 lol, people in authority have the greatest incentive to use misinformation for profit and gain. That isn't capitalism, its fascism.
@@baronnashor7713 not really. Both left and right wing media get paid off of virality...and mistruth stirs up pay dirt quite fervently for both sides
@@baronnashor7713 What's the problem with the answer?
What you said about us being used to being lied to is, to me, the root of every issue you stated. We live in a society of distrust, and folk are taking advantage of that. The sad part is that I don’t see it getting better.
Social Media doesn't help either.
@@K1ng1995 not at all.
11:35
I *ABSOLUTELY* want a lizard in charge of my health care.
personal opinion
1)The human brain often give more reward chemicals for useful data then factual data. Useful data needs to conform to social usage.
2)The reason why gossip travels so fast is because gossip doesn't create new data, just new connections to already collected representations. Understanding new ways for new representations to operate needs additional time to learn.
most conspiracy = cheap gossip endorphins
The most influential book of my entire life I read when I was 13... After picking it up at my libraries book sale for 10 cents... Neil Postman's "Amusing ourselves to Death"... I'm a first generation millioninal... I was their when social media was birthed... And because of that book I have and still do avoid it like the plague... I saw the damage and danger well before most people even knew what a Chatroom or posting on social media was... I was avoiding social media before the first anything even went viral... I saw what the treat that it posed at 13... I'm 40 now... And experts are just now just starting to assess the harm its causing... let alone fight it... or even what to do to help those harmed by it... Many have warned all of us well before the danger starts in the disaster often decades in advance... And we're always treated like we're telling you the sky is fallin... And unfortunately one ever seems to realize until its too late... And they're being crushed to death by the sky...
There is some truth in lies, which is why the ability to question what your told is important. And to come up with your own conclusions
Tbh I'd argue that a core problem is that we've moved away from the notion of the burden of proof falling on the accuser. At least to me it feels increasingly common for news to spread itself without providing sources that fuelled the article to begin with. In a sense, one could argue that even videos like this are guilty of the same thing. It is impossible to expect people, especially working adults, to spend what free time they have searching online for information regarding a one-off video or comment they found online and how factually correct that video or comment is. As a result we're inevitably left with personal account / experience and how well the video or comment resonates with our experience as a method of fact-checking, inaccurate as it will likely be. The only thing we can do and should do is remain humble and acknowledge our lack of understanding in the topic and avoid aiding the spread of the information we read if we don't comprehend it.
Even if not everyone check the sources of articles they read it is still important for the sources to be there because it makes it easier for others to call out inaccuracies when the article eventually spreads. When sources aren't easy to come by most people are never going to bother arguing about it because fact-checking it yourself simply consumes too much time. I feel like this might be a particular catalyst when it comes to fuelling ignorance in the US due to the amount of free time people having being generally more varied, with some working 12+ hours every day and have little choice but to accept what is fed to them.
Of course, societal trust is an important detail as well. If you're from the US but have never been to Europe you have no idea if Europe actually exists. You're relying entirely on your common sense and what you were taught in school to remain confident in the belief that Europe definitely exists and when trust in society is low, more and more people are willing to be far more paranoid about which things they were taught in school is real and what isn't, further fuelling a anarchistic mindset where the only one you can truly believe is yourself.
The world can certainly be a wacky place.
Because people attention spans now a days aren't great. We'd rather spend 30 seconds watching tiktok than something like this
All I use are Reuters, AP, and two local news sites for news. No feeds, no social media. This seems about right. Also, as GenX, I get memes. Because the internet exists and I have access to it.
Reuters regularly collaborates with the CIA and it gets large amounts of funding from the UK government in the 70s. Now they switched to getting funding by the Reuters Foundation... which is funded by various western governments, simply making the state funding a step removed from the spotlight. You are limiting your reading to literal state propaganda to empower a liberal viewpoint (liberal as in liberalism, not as in DNC/"progressive")
If you don't read the news you're underinformed. If you do read the news you're misinformed.
- Mark Twain (probably)
Thanks to Keeps for sponsoring this video! Head to keeps.com/wisecrack to get 50% off your first order of Keeps hair loss treatment.
If you find yourself wondering "But why don't they talk about CNN?" it's because we already made a video on that! ruclips.net/video/YRkkkxZZpAc/видео.html
Amazing levels of cuckoldry here. Unsubscribed. Go enjoy your fake news CNN and msnbc you estrogen soyboys
It's not the truth that's breaking down. It's our collective willingness to believe the truth that's breaking down. Our bleak reality has caused us to cling to comforting statements, regardless of whether they're true. This clinging is making society worse, resulting in a positive feedback loop.
No video is more important now then that one here. It is shapping politics and society.
After all, how is it possible to talk about anything without at least some common ground to begin with? Without truth, anyone can lie about how the suffering of others is needed, and how fights, not words, should decide who will suffer.
My bet. The periodic (could be sai, dialetic) swing between individualism and coletivism.
Before watching the video, I m gonna guess and say because of greed, power and money.
And you put Alex Jones, not Rachael Maddow or Brian Stelter in the thumbnail? You just earned yourself and UNsubscriber. Peace ✌️
The way I've been looking at it...
What is fact and what is feeling doesn't matter. In a day and age where every person can immediately tweet their thoughts on a news story in which all they know is a sensationalized headline, what matters is who has the best hot-take, who's hot-take was seen best both in the present moment and who's hot-take has aged well.
This is why we have double-down culture, reassuring your hot-take is the correct one just too early in history, or how moving-the-goalpost becomes an incredibly delicate artform.
Our feelings don't care about anyone's facts because we don't live in objectivity, we live in subjectivity and no one has the right to tell someone their life is wrong
- or so that's how i see the thinking going.
In his defense even though he is very troubled... the frog thing "even though horribly generalized by him", chemical dumping was damaging the hormonal systems of the frogs in a nearby river/lake causing many frogs to act like their female counterpart.
Hermaphroditic frogs also popped up in the area
They always use a hint of truth to lure you into their delusions.
As if it was being done intentional and not a side effect of our own drug usage.
A 1/2 truth is half still a lie. It wasn't some government conspiracy to make us all gay, it was company's trying to save a buck.
Yes that totally excuse homophobic dog whistling. Or maybe Alex Jones really likes nature and was just trying to defend the poor frogs.
@@BlueLightningSky maybe he loves eating frog legs, and doesn’t want the WEF making him eat bugs instead of hermaphrodite frogs😂
You know, while his frog statement is humorously strange, endocrine disruption and environmental contamination - even in the first world - are serious issues. In addition to diet and a sedentary lifestyle, the accumulation of chemicals was listed as a culprit of the “dramatic” rise in cancer in people under age 50 in a recent study.
It’s easy to mix something real with something absurd. So there were “gay frogs” but that it is a natural phenomenon to combat overpopulation wouldn’t fly with his audience. So he took the very real threat we all face being exposed to multiple chemicals. An unnatural thing.Mixed it with natures remedy for overpopulation. Just so he is able to continue to spread hatred against the lgbtq community. To label it as unnatural.
You’d think most people would see through it but of course not. They go with what they want to believe in order to justify their bigotry. I know I basically repeated what you just said but for the maybe one person that will say oh to this and end their bigotry … it’s worth it
Yup especially when they used a certain plasticizer to help make bottles less brittle, although this was changed I found trace amounts running a sample of a few water bottles plastic made after 2016 through a gcms.
Alex Jones is nuts though. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day
Our age old problem still persists, we judge things in in two different extremes,either you side with side or the other, in case one is not positioned in either side, they are bombarded with exaggerated information leaving the person confused.
Do we have sources from this episode? I’ve been thinking and discussing a lot about this recently, and it would be awesome to read some sources
The book titled Manufacturing Consent pretty much explains why misinformation is very alive today.
Hah...I forgot that Tucker Carlson got pissed because m&m mascots didn't give him wood anymore.
😆😆😆😆😆😆😆😆🌝😆🌝
Internet Rule 49: no matter what it is, it is someone's fetish
There's two big pivot points in how disinformation spread in American media:
4:44 The loss of the Fairness Doctrine lost the need to give time to make counterarguments pushed forward information silos where the need to verify claims became moot.
8:35 The allowance of opinion as news with the understanding that the people could tell the difference opened us to the point that most people couldn't tell the difference.
Glad to see you guys have hit 3M subscribers! I took philosophy in college so I've enjoyed your channel very much, since you had (circa) 1.5M. Love you guys; keep up the hard work!
Thanks you so much! We appreciate the continued support.
@@WisecrackEDU I can understand memes you fu.king loser! Gen X also does not care about your little memes! We stand with Gen z who are also real tired of millennials!
@@WisecrackEDU word!
There's also the matter of cognitive dissonance. It's a human thing to believe in reinforcing information and rejecting contradictory of the same. It's often more comforting to embrace an incredible lie than confront a jarring truth.
This video did indeed give me real information. Sometimes I think I know most everything about a topic before I click a video but I'm proven wrong like 90% of the time. Funny how that works -- have to wonder if other people are falling into the same trap
I commend you for self-examining your personal biases, if only more people were like us.
I love how there is always a dualist language with tech companies: Conspiracy theories are what people want to click on, so 'Facebook rewards the sharing of fake news!' It is such an obvious attempt to redefine what people enjoy with some 'algorithm which evil tech has created'. We want to keep our purity and have our Facebook too.
I'm agreeing with you but also weak-minded people like my father just want to believe anything that makes them feel good and not think about all the horrible things in the world. So they cope by thinking about all the horrible things in the world and blaming them on whomever they think deserves it. It makes sense if you don't think about it and they definitely don't.
@@poterror la génération des autruches
Fake news is FAR more profitable for companies like that. They get substantially more clicks from them. The Social Dilemma is an amazing documentary and I highly recommend it to everyone. I deleted my IG and FB after watching it and my happiness level increased dramatically.
That's nothing new either. When Armstrong stepped onto the moon, it was "a great achievement of mankind". And when people talk about anything these days that's "good" or "an improvement", it's always an achievement of mankind, rather than that of the handful of minds that actually created computers for example, or planes and flight. When Hitler did a genocide, it was all the fault of Hitler and the Nazis, rather than a failure of mankind as a whole. "Look what WE achieved" vs "look what he/she/they destroyed".
Even look at animals vs humans. When animals do cute and/or preferential things, we anthropomorphize the behaviors. When humans do bad, we call them animals. "My dog is a people!" and "fur babies" vs "Hitler was an animal" or "that rabid murderer", etc. Base anger and other "negative" behaviors are "animalistic", good behaviors are human.
@@SardonicusI haven't thought about that. Very good points.
Alex Jones single-handily destroyed my family. I hate him more than you can imagine.
how so man? im intrigued
@@grimmfromnz They've all become crazy conspiracy theorists. It's just really sad that there are any people out there at all who can listen to that man for more than 2 minutes and not be able to tell how massively stupid he is.
@@ForAnAngel sounds like the rest of your family is a lot smarter than you.
@@ForAnAngel I mean being fair to jones a large portion of what he discusses comes into fruition and if people follow him and he's right about something then they think oh ok what's next yk but yeah I know what you mean it can be so tiring listen to conspiracy that and disinformation this.
@@grimmfromnz He's literally never been right about anything. WTF are you talking about? He is the stupidest and craziest person who has ever lived.
I jokingly say "I blame Descartes" for this, but jokes aside I think there's something about how western philosophical thought put "logic/rational" thought on a pedestal and marked all "feelings/emotions" as suspect and weak. Which also got adopted into why women are branded as emotional and unable to be strong/lead/innovate/etc. The result of this context is that people are rarely taught or learn to integrate their emotions into their being. But we aren’t robots, and our emotions do influence us in terms of our decision making processes and even of what we perceive. We are often not rational creatures so much as rationalizing creatures. And the more we ignore and discount our emotions and don't integrate ourselves as a whole being of emotions, feelings, and thought, then the more at the effect of our emotions we can become, without even realizing it. By pretending we're not swayed by our emotions we become blind to how we are, indeed, being swayed by them. If and when we engage with ourselves in a whole manner (emotions, feelings, and thoughts) we get to embrace the signals emotions give us without becoming them, and without being used by them. We can instead include and merge them with our active mindfulness to give us presence from which we can then choose. Agency becomes ours and, as a bonus, we get to enjoy the glorious experience(s) of being alive and the vast catalogue of feelings and emotions. :)
Philosophers of both east and west and male and female are primarily concerned with truth and wisdom, not so much thought and emotion which are rather less useful terms being overly vague when discussing the range of topics that philosophy deals with. Of course those are relevant and Descartes and many philosophers are deeply aware of both the enervating and distorting tendencies of emotional and other kinds of bias. From dread to agape and every emotion in between including raw power lust all have been analyzed and carefully accounted for when philosophers of east or west endeavor to discover the universal amidst endless perspectives and distractions. Appreciate your comment. Just offering my feedback for what its worth.
@@markyarbrough5511 Yes indeed! Most (all?) well developed philosophical traditions and inquiries begin with developing being present and getting grounded in what's so. Even Yoda speaks of it in the Empire Strikes Back. :D That allows us to distinguish what's so around us from our emotions, as well as distinguishing thoughting vs thinking. I only warn against then becoming fixated on any side of the coin, whether it's what's so, our emotions, feelings, sensations, thoughts, thinking, logic, or etc. How they are all part of us and how they interplay is where we begin to discover those universalities that make our human beingness. :)
LoL 😆😆😆 a hair loss snake oil advertisment in a misinformation essay 😆💦
Excellent video wisecrack, we absolutely need this information out there!
The difference between conspiracy theory and fact is about 6 months.... and shrinking.
100%, the "news" channels are rapidly losing control of the narrative and they can't stop the truth from coming out
'crowdfacting'
The human brain is a pattern seeking machine. Much of the happenings in the world don't have complex causes. Conspiracy theories often create signals from noise and satisfy that itch for deeper meaning behind events, even if it requires potentially conflicting beliefs.
And random events!
A criticism of this channel seems to be be that they have a hard time qualifying things and it can make different times feel more ideal or destroy some nuance. I think a big part of it is the constraints of the format not allowing you to make a 18ish minute video that covers everything and ignores bias and be entertaining.
Over the long term I truly find it hard to imagine any substantial subsect of my peers (millennials actively involved in keeping up with events) reaching the point of disillusion and spite that is being broadcast from news sources at either extreme but every group has outliers and those individuals tend to not only be the loudest but also the most abrasive. It's sad when basic rational logic in approaching differing viewpoints seems to be in such low supply.
This seemed somewhat inconsistent. If truth is relative, why would "All truths" have something in common; like equality? How did this get tacked on as a requirement for "Truth"?
The irony is that I got a "Daily Wire" ad while watching this.
It's not "misinformation". What's with all the scrubbing of language? It's called "lying".
Synonyms exist
Scrubbing of language? Language is not some static thing that remains permanent for ever. It’s a living thing that evolves over time.
If you went back in time just 300 years you’d barely understand what people would say to you.
misinformation = inconvenient fact
@@LoveStrangeDr language does evolve naturally over time. What has been happening over the past decade is the official definition of specific words changed immediately when the current meaning is inconvenient to those in power. The word vaccine comes to mind ;)
@@guillermoelnino there is irony in what you say. The fact that you can freely share that information with me should inconvenience the all knowing all powerful big bad government eh?
It's not only America. It's global.
Ye
Evryone in human worls needs a certain amount of lies in their life , majority of it is self deception and will full ignorance .
Like that guy who work his ass of to get a manager rank , constantly ignoring the amount of pressure he will be under .
He only dreams of the good outcome of his work .
The truth is life doesnt get as good as we predict it to be .
But sometimes life get better bcz of random reasons .
Enter the next thing we ignore , the fact that life is way more random than we give it credit .
We talk about money vs power vs talent vs popularity , while willfully ignoring how random can things be .
The way how mainstream media handled the Depp trial is the most recent reason why there's distrust in these so-called gatekeepers.
Emotions are probably the biggest driver in hate, ignorance, and violence.
I like to think of emotions as alarm bells signalling me to think deeper about WHY I'm feeling that way, rather than an invitation to act on said emotions.
I love the wildly misinforming ads inside the video about misinformation.
Yes the newspapers back then certainly had a hand in starting the Spanish-American War with their version of weapons of mass destruction stories.
sometimes you gotta think if its mostly boils down to the modern need of maintaining/expanding the ego and not accepting how insignificant oneself is.
Video should be “why people fall for propaganda time and time again”
It's a problem believing what's probable, the more you find out what politicians, governments, and corporations are capable of. Like a trump, Monsanto, operation Northwoods ect.
Why do I like this channel? Because it’s more objective than most stuff on television
This channel is on the left. But you probably don’t notice that because it leaves political words out of its description/titles
I think there was this jester who survived the fear of being beheaded by king Louis XIV by making fart jokes. Farting was universal and and obsured enough to mention in polite society that he kind of paved the way for comedy to survive.
You missed the opportunity to say "go to keeps because there's nothing more fake than a toupee"
Anybody else see the title and start singing: "Tell me lies, tell me sweet little lies..."?
Before even watching I imagine a trainwreck
In 1997 you'd AltaVista "Clinton is a lizard" and find a bunch of Geocities pages. A lot of those would have that smoking skull gif and a midi version of the X-Files theme
Dude when has misinformation not been a part of public discourse
1:34
I'm guessing back when the things being reported didn't have a political slant or didn't seem to, anyways. Like when I was a kid growing up, local news didn't feel like it had a political side to it.
@@poterror or a monopoly
@@poterror Bias always has and always will exist in all news. The best you can do is look for news that is honest about that bias. It exists in everything from what they report on to how they report on it, what facts they include, what parts they embellish, etc.
@@poterror It didn't feel like it had a political slant, because it has the same politics as you. Local news is very reactionary. Talking about the threat of crime, anti labour organizing, pro police etc.
funniest thing is people who think always believing the exact opposite of whatever news makes them automatically right
Hi. Every week you give the world a free lesson on ethics and psychology and sociology and countless other topics. Your information checks out, but that pales in comparison to the overall positive effect your videos bring. In an ever increasing insane world, you provide about 20 minutes a week to explain complex things to slightly lesser intelligent people like me. You could be a liar with a malicious intention but I really doubt it. Just know, there are people who give great value to your videos. I am one of them.
Take it with a grain of salt
I'd also add that there's a toddler-like reaction to things people like/disliake vs. things that are real. There are tons of examples, but the most interesting ones are the ones that are on the subjective side because some people have this idea that subjectivity isn't real. Except that your experiences are 100% real. Look at many kinds of phobias -- for example, lepidopterophobia (fear of butterflies or moths). The danger butterflies pose is not real but some people's fears definitely are.
An even more interesting example is when people say they like/dislike something, but in reality, they experience the opposite. SNL had a funny sketch where people were shocked when they found out the song they were humming and dancing to was a Taylor Swift song. Presumably because they are not the type of person that is supposed to like Taylor Swift. Clip is here: ruclips.net/video/PAhAz7JU0dg/видео.html
Nope not me
I think what makes it hard for people to accept the truths of the world is that they're not nearly as emotionally pulling cuz you know when you go back to religion gods and demons brawling it out in the heavens is a lot cooler than hey storms happen because water evaporates out of bodies of water into the sky they collect together into a cloud and then eventually that cloud gets too dense which causes gravity pulls down on it.
I find it interesting but I'm a big nerd so yeah
Yeah, they believe what they want, and convince themselves it’s the truth by seeing signs or whatever. It is cool, but damn if you can’t become a millionaire quick by exploiting the faithful elderly.
@@CChissel All religion/seudoscience in a nutshell
Scientists & Skeptics: Why don't you back it up with source?!
Religious leaders/ pseudoscientists: My source is that I made it the fuck up!
HAARP exists ?
I always thought of it as that as well. As much of as I love learning about mythical gods and creature. These are characters in literature then anything.
The other issue, is that when things are verifiable truth, they are often debunked immediately by the usual crowd because they don't meet their political bias.
"If a lie is only printed often enough, it becomes a quasi-truth, and if such a truth is repeated often enough, it becomes an article of belief, a dogma, and men will die for it." From The Crown of a Life (1869) by Isa Blagden
What good is "truth" if that basic human instinct of empathy isn't employed? Our fundamental flaw is that...we're flawed. We do not perceive reality as it actually is, but as our brains interpret. So, GI/GO. We react poorly to what an already flawed understanding of what IS. If every engagement with others involved and rested upon empathy as a cornerstone instead of an afterthought application, collective understanding would refine "truth" collectively felt to much greater effect than trying to navigate that concept wholly alone. I don't think sharing an experience is ALWAYS beneficial with every person; some people revel in their misunderstanding of reality. But, as a go-to instead of the converse with the average interaction with others, I can't help but feel that this would progress instead of stymie human understanding.
So many people don’t understand that. We aren’t seeing reality as it is, only what our brains can interpret with our senses, and they are quite limited. I agree with the rest of what you’ve said here. You can never really understand someone without empathy, we can’t be simplified down to a binary and fit in a neat box of labels or impressions.
Hard to have empathy for people that go around spreading misinformation. They are actually a danger to themselves and others
It's overload of information, we've been blasted with information for years that its become overwhelming and now people are kinda done and so will stick to their truths rather than actual truths
Is anyone disturbed by the guy discussing truth while shilling for “save your hair” bullsnot? Not to mention the incongruity of a dude always in a ball cap claiming a company can give you luscious locks? What a way to pay the bills… smh
yea sponsorships suck and most of the products kinda suck. you just gotta ignore it. everybody’s gotta eat
Don't hate the player, hate the game. Also it's pretty funny to sit there criticizing someone for making high quality content for your entertainment that's literally FREE to you because of sponsors.
I'm 54 years old. I grew up obviously at a time when there was no Internet (only bulletin boards in the early 1980's). I don't know whether, if I was a teen or in my twenties now, I would fall for any of the blatant tactics and emotional rhetoric, but while it is widespread, it still usually is unsophisticated. So there's still not an excuse to avoid personal responsibility and to fail to prioritise self-awareness............I'm joking. There never was any real social education in self-awareness and objectivity. It's just that the technology now exists to allow a consumer market for self-validation, confirmation of biases and to indulge every kind of lazy end run to feeling self-important.
Shouldn’t CNN be in your thumbnail? 🙄
@@RenSako there's MOUNDS of evidence of CNN and other mainstream news outlets pushing false narratives, don't be daft
Will get less views like CNN mike drop
Some people are open to any possibility, and honestly examine ALL evidence in a rational manner to come to a conclusion, followed by a moral evaluation. Others start with a desire for a specific moral evaluation, and work backwards assembling any fact that supports them, and dismissing any fact that does not.
I'd vote to bring back the news fairness doctrine.
Which Lyndon Johnson openly admitted to using as a tool to suppress opposition to his Vietnam policies so no.
To be honest, this is another wisecrack video that can be summed up by this sketch from Man Carrying Things
ruclips.net/video/_WyKYB4sg2Q/видео.html
Thoroughly good information and enjoyable to watch. Bravo.
if you suck the democratic dong all day long, nice shill he is.
even if we the public are a little too obsessed with fake news it doesn't help when those in power are all to happy if not eager to affirm our biases for their own gains as opposed to ours food for thought....
'Our culture is saturated in BS' - I know, I just watched this video
Truth is dead. Truth remains dead. And we have killed him.” - Michael probably
Alex Jones discount Rush Limbaugh.
I'll guess 'because it confirms a bias' or 'because the truth is too hard to deal with'.
"Safe and effective."
3 months to slow the spread
Omg...the gay frogs made me about choke on my lunch as i was listening to this. Lol how have I missed that "gem." Jesus wept, man, take a breath, drink some water and go sleep off the coke. 😆
So for once I comment on your question at the end of your videos asking, "is our society too fracture to ever agree on anything ever again?" Who is to say it ever was Micheal? It's probably more American to be as fractured and disagree on things and fake news just being apart of all that. Online social media has just brought all of that closer to forefront than ever before.
I think it is safe to say our country at various points was much less fractured than it is now.
People always disagree on things, that’s normal, but there were far far more “moderates” in times past.
People who for better or worse sought a middle ground, a compromise.
These days the Republicans and Democrats are basically an angry married couple that only fight and want a divorce.
True, there was fake news back in the late 1700s and early 1800s. But, on the disagreements, it’s different now. Most happen online usually in anonymity. I believe it’s gotten worse now than it ever has, because it’s bled into the real world, where they end up giving these faceless voices a face, even if it is the wrong one. And may possibly assault them or something, just because they say something similar or in line with what they’ve argued with people online. I think people are being seen less as individuals because of this, the by product being less motivation to try and listen to someone and understand them. Of course I could just be thinking it’s a new thing when in reality it hasn’t changed like fake news hasn’t. Whatever.
@@CChissel part of it is tribalism.
Part of it is human nature. We like labeling things and putting them in neat boxes. We like labelling ourselves even, as a sense of identity.
Especially nowadays a LOT of marginalized groups have various labels that they feel are deeply tied to their identity and who they are as a person. So when they feel being “liberal” or “conservative” is a core part of what makes them a person… they get super defensive or even aggressive because they are defending what makes them… them.
Beliefs and political associations are more than ever a fundamental part of who you are. Partly because certain human rights and groups are harmed along party lines.
I’d bet anything gay people feel generally disenfranchised and attacked by conservative Christians. And conversely I’d wager that wealthy people feel attacked by socialist liberals. Once you align yourself with one group, you make intrinsically enemies of the other with no room for nuance or… humanity/individuality.
There just needs to be a legal punishment for disseminating false information. I'm not qualified to decide it, since my first choice would be to just remove the vocal cords from people like Alex Jones, but there does need to be something.
As a power-hungry megalomaniac, I also would like the ability to severely punish those who spread false information, as long as me and my buddies get to decide what "false" means.
@@AJX-2 I specifically said I am not qualified to decide. And it's not about trying to spread some subjective perception of truth as it is about preventing widespread harm from the spread of factually incorrect information, like news channels mislabeling a 2 year old joke video as a food challenge and giving it much more widespread awareness in such a way as to prevent people realizing it's a joke.
I like how he centered on the most outspoken controversial person he could find instead of a more broad view of the subject. Nice job.
Just as long as you liked it... 👍🏼
I think the question is less about if humans can believe in universal truths, because everyone shares universal truths(the sky is blue, smoking kills.) weather or not people want to believe the truth is an individual’s prerogative. The real question is, who is going to be the arbiter of truth? As in, can there be a source of truth for the world and would that arbiter be able to provide truth without bias and how does it deal with conflicting truths.
Or in short: epistemology, where are you to guide through theses dark times?
🤷🏾♂️
Before even watching this video I can say it’s because of inequality. In any given population if there’s a crazy disparity of income amongst the rich and poor crazy beliefs will emerge
Why the music?? You don’t need back music… it is unnecessary stimulation and distracts from your message.
Ugh it’s giving me anxiety… lol
Can’t get through it. But I’m sure you made a great point 👍👍
3:08
It always comes back to Ronald fuckin Reagan
Without the fairness doctrine holding journalism to some form of standard, the industry has no incentive to report acutely or impartially. The line between news and propaganda has vanished.
I used to be a borderline free speech absolutist, because I thought that an unrestricted marketplace of ideas would lead to reason coming out on top. I no longer believe that. We need some regulations in place because no one benefits from the onslaught of blatant lies.
Ok só just think about WHO will regulate it aka who will decide what’s true and what’s not
So you want president Trump telling you what is and isn't true?
@@williamw3501 Uh no, he’s part of the blatant lies that need to be regulated.
@@thearomanticshipper4468 so what's to stop a far right authority controlling your speech when they take power? If you grant that power to a democratic regime now; that pendulum will swing back the other way. Kinda like when Germany took away guns. That happened before hitler; what's the worst that can happen right? 🤔
@@williamw3501 🤓
The Founding Fathers: "If we disguise ourselves as Hershey's Kisses, perhaps the Illuminati will leave us alone."
How wrong they were
Objective truths exist as long as one is willing to establish that their individual view is not an absolute truth. If one cannot acknowledge the faults of their own eyes, they will never be able to truly see. Our world is constantly in flux, and to ignore that because it conflicts with our "idealized" view of absolute truth is to be willfully blind.
We need the trust of one another in order to see the world in each other's eyes, and to acknowledge we cannot see the world as it truly is without that trust.
We currently live in a world where the word "truth" is actually inflammatory. Maybe this is why aliens are finally starting to show up more.😂
...but can we also talk about how on both sides there's been proven lies?
It's hard to trust if you are constantly just being fed someone else's interest dressed as "news". There seems to be a global distrust of the "regular media" coming from someone living in the Caribbean (DR).
That's mostly because one side believes in scientific facts and the other side believes in fairy tales. It's pretty cut and dry really
No one gets everything right every time. But there are media sources that try, and others that don't.
I agree but the solution taken by most people is consume "alternative" media outlets which tend to be more biased and profit-oriented.
If anything, people are so distrustful because they haven't sharpened their critical thinking skills. It's good to be moderately skeptical, and assess information based on that skepticism
Great with that supplement gag, I can't tell if he's being sarcastic about the free market dribble.
Makes good, thoughtful analysis on miniformation, disinformation and that means for truth and capitalism 👍
Then tries to sell you bogus hair products 👎
Is it? I've never tried it, did it not work for you?
Doublespeak validates the "faithful."