Stevens and goat linked to an interview with Jonathan Rauch that didn’t get much play here. The subject deserves a thread. The interview is a good way to spend an hour. Rauch is asked about his book called a Constitution of Knowledge. He generally describes the problems of misinformation, disinformation, conspiracy theories, and what to do about all of it. Despite picking a few nits, I generally agree with Rauch’s set up where he describes the problem and how we got here. That’s good stuff.
Rauch comes down strongly on the side of freedom of expression and the role it plays in finding reality and truth. Without mentioning it in so many words, Rauch exposes the tension between free expression and allowing free expression that advocates against free expression—or in these terms, expression that is propaganda.
I understand Rauch to believe that truth and reality have strong elements objectivity and we need “guardrails, institutions and rules“ to support determining truth and reality. I hear Rauch as saying substantial agreement about truth and reality is the goal and that will reduce our disagreements to manageable proportions. I think just the opposite. When it comes to ideas, politics, art, and culture, all of which are necessary for a well functioning society, seeking truth and reality is a process, not a destination. It’s an aspiration. Institutionalizing the process and burdening it with rules is what leads to dogma and dogma isn’t good even if we all agree with it.
Rauch didn’t mention what I believe the real antidote to the problems of disinformation and propaganda, and that is better education focused on real critical thinking. The objective is not to have social norms to determine for us the illusion of truth and reality. The objective should be for us to know how to think about those things and be unrestricted in our ability to discuss them.
Rauch comes down strongly on the side of freedom of expression and the role it plays in finding reality and truth. Without mentioning it in so many words, Rauch exposes the tension between free expression and allowing free expression that advocates against free expression—or in these terms, expression that is propaganda.
I understand Rauch to believe that truth and reality have strong elements objectivity and we need “guardrails, institutions and rules“ to support determining truth and reality. I hear Rauch as saying substantial agreement about truth and reality is the goal and that will reduce our disagreements to manageable proportions. I think just the opposite. When it comes to ideas, politics, art, and culture, all of which are necessary for a well functioning society, seeking truth and reality is a process, not a destination. It’s an aspiration. Institutionalizing the process and burdening it with rules is what leads to dogma and dogma isn’t good even if we all agree with it.
Rauch didn’t mention what I believe the real antidote to the problems of disinformation and propaganda, and that is better education focused on real critical thinking. The objective is not to have social norms to determine for us the illusion of truth and reality. The objective should be for us to know how to think about those things and be unrestricted in our ability to discuss them.