Hacker News Reader

Comment by Xylakant | Hacker News Reader

The problem that I currently see rampant is that “definite proof” is hard to come by. There are a lot of people that use a set of alternate facts and call these definite proof. I’m afraid that with some people, I’m no longer arguing about how to interpret certain data, but we’re on a level where we cannot even agree that we are observing the same universe. And I honestly don’t have an answer to that problem.

Second to that: Data can change as we gather more knowledge about something. Covid is a prime example - in the beginning, very little was known. Some theories turned out to be mostly true, others didn’t hold up. Some advice was sound, other not. Still, some people point back and use the evolving knowledge as argument that nothing is knowable and we shouldn’t do anything.

View on HN

I’m afraid that with some people, I’m no longer arguing about how to interpret certain data, but we’re on a level where we cannot even agree that we are observing the same universe.

On the upside, this is one of the more respectful descriptions of the problem space in question that I've seen. It's common to act like "The other person is just a nutter, clearly."

Maybe the human race will eventually sort it out.

This doesn't really move the conversation forward, but an important point to make (I think) is that we as a species have never agreed that we're observing the same universe. Think of all the wildly different beliefs that have co-existed (though certainly not peacefully!) at the same times throughout history. It's a feature of all reality, not a bug of the _current_ reality (I say this because some people seem to think we're in a new & novel time of history where no one agrees on anything because of "the internet" or "misinformation", but I don't think that's the case. Humans have always disagree on what reality is).

I have this theory that what-about-ism as a debate technique, elevated by more readily available un-helpful "facts" (e.g. single varient evaluation of complex system), hased cause people to forget the utility of facts. When you and I have a REAL disagrement about something importand and complex the FACTS that we can both agree on and take for granted are what ENABLES us to find a new higher resolution understanding - we can get further because we can focus. I try to look out for what-about-ism disguised as refuting evidence, and approach people's belief epistemologically.

And then there were the theories that were "debunked" and marked as "conspiracy theories", often by people in powerful positions, against their better knowledge, because a narrative was to be held up. Masks are useless. There is no connection to the Wuhan virology lab which specifically worked on that exact class of virii and gain-of-function research...

I used to be carefully trusty of official sources. I am no longer.

And alot of the definite proof is obtuse and not readily readable.

> Still, some people point back and use the evolving knowledge as argument that nothing is knowable and we shouldn’t do anything.

And some people point back and use the censorship of people who turned out to be correct as an argument that we were way too quick to leverage the 'misinformation' label to suppress the truth.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com