Artwork

Innehåll tillhandahållet av Mentallyunscripted. Allt poddinnehåll inklusive avsnitt, grafik och podcastbeskrivningar laddas upp och tillhandahålls direkt av Mentallyunscripted eller deras podcastplattformspartner. Om du tror att någon använder ditt upphovsrättsskyddade verk utan din tillåtelse kan du följa processen som beskrivs här https://sv.player.fm/legal.
Player FM - Podcast-app
Gå offline med appen Player FM !

Ep15 - The NYT Approach to Fighting Inaccurate Information is Problematic

1:18:03
 
Dela
 

Manage episode 289348597 series 2854361
Innehåll tillhandahållet av Mentallyunscripted. Allt poddinnehåll inklusive avsnitt, grafik och podcastbeskrivningar laddas upp och tillhandahålls direkt av Mentallyunscripted eller deras podcastplattformspartner. Om du tror att någon använder ditt upphovsrättsskyddade verk utan din tillåtelse kan du följa processen som beskrivs här https://sv.player.fm/legal.

Attention is the new currency. And news outlets will do anything to get it. That includes doling out biased information lacking context or straight-up deception. Critical thinking is your weapon to cut through the noise. But how? The New York Times presents a method, called SIFT, in the article, Don't Go Down the Rabbit Hole.
In this episode of Mentally Unscripted, Paul and Scott dissect SIFT. In doing so, they render their judgment on this model.
To borrow a phrase from data processing, garbage in garbage out. That means the output of any model is only as good as the data you put into it. SIFT is no exception. It's only as good as the effort you put into it.
While it seems like the authors are presenting this model in good faith, it only works if you use it in good faith. If all you're doing is looking for information to confirm your biases, this model is perfect for you.
To put it another way. SIFT is much more apt to give biased, agenda-driven people the illusion of critical thinking than it is to help them get to the meat of an argument. Thus, it will only reinforce the notion that they're correct.
Think of it as "How stupid people can make it look like they're thinking without having to think."
Listen to the podcast to hear the flaws in the model and how you can improve it.
Resources mentioned in this episode:

  • The Madness of Crowds: Gender, Race and Identity, by Douglass Murray
  • Paul Graham

Mental models, biases, and fallacies mentioned in this episode:

  • Incentives matter
  • Consensus and social proof
  • Steelman
  • Confirmation bias
  • Disconfirming evidence
  • Cognitive dissonance
  • Probabilistic thinking
  • Bayesian updating
  • Halo/Horn effect
  • Triangulation
  • Prioritization
  • Low information diet
  • Availability heuristic
  • Silly/serious syndrome

Image by John Forster from Pixabay


This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.mentallyunscripted.com
  continue reading

59 episoder

Artwork
iconDela
 
Manage episode 289348597 series 2854361
Innehåll tillhandahållet av Mentallyunscripted. Allt poddinnehåll inklusive avsnitt, grafik och podcastbeskrivningar laddas upp och tillhandahålls direkt av Mentallyunscripted eller deras podcastplattformspartner. Om du tror att någon använder ditt upphovsrättsskyddade verk utan din tillåtelse kan du följa processen som beskrivs här https://sv.player.fm/legal.

Attention is the new currency. And news outlets will do anything to get it. That includes doling out biased information lacking context or straight-up deception. Critical thinking is your weapon to cut through the noise. But how? The New York Times presents a method, called SIFT, in the article, Don't Go Down the Rabbit Hole.
In this episode of Mentally Unscripted, Paul and Scott dissect SIFT. In doing so, they render their judgment on this model.
To borrow a phrase from data processing, garbage in garbage out. That means the output of any model is only as good as the data you put into it. SIFT is no exception. It's only as good as the effort you put into it.
While it seems like the authors are presenting this model in good faith, it only works if you use it in good faith. If all you're doing is looking for information to confirm your biases, this model is perfect for you.
To put it another way. SIFT is much more apt to give biased, agenda-driven people the illusion of critical thinking than it is to help them get to the meat of an argument. Thus, it will only reinforce the notion that they're correct.
Think of it as "How stupid people can make it look like they're thinking without having to think."
Listen to the podcast to hear the flaws in the model and how you can improve it.
Resources mentioned in this episode:

  • The Madness of Crowds: Gender, Race and Identity, by Douglass Murray
  • Paul Graham

Mental models, biases, and fallacies mentioned in this episode:

  • Incentives matter
  • Consensus and social proof
  • Steelman
  • Confirmation bias
  • Disconfirming evidence
  • Cognitive dissonance
  • Probabilistic thinking
  • Bayesian updating
  • Halo/Horn effect
  • Triangulation
  • Prioritization
  • Low information diet
  • Availability heuristic
  • Silly/serious syndrome

Image by John Forster from Pixabay


This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.mentallyunscripted.com
  continue reading

59 episoder

Alla avsnitt

×
 
Loading …

Välkommen till Player FM

Player FM scannar webben för högkvalitativa podcasts för dig att njuta av nu direkt. Den är den bästa podcast-appen och den fungerar med Android, Iphone och webben. Bli medlem för att synka prenumerationer mellan enheter.

 

Snabbguide