How to Win an Argument with a Sophist
People have hang-ups and blind spots and phobias and just sometimes they have a principled refusal to take something seriously.
I think that some philosophers are what Socrates said they were, sophists. They’re in it to win, not to get at the truth. And there are lots of sneaky, tricky things that people can do. I don’t recommend any of that. I think we want to get at the truth.
So many of the tools I describe in my book are ways of avoiding fooling yourself or being fooled by somebody else. I don’t offer any advice on how to fool others. I do think, however, and perhaps this is a fine line, that in philosophy what you have to do is tweak people’s imagination. And people have hang-ups and blind spots and phobias and just sometimes they have a principled refusal to take something seriously. They think it’s beneath their dignity and they refuse to take something seriously.
For those attitudes a careful formal argument is not going to cut any ice at all. You have to find more artful ways of dislodging those convictions, those sort of emotional blockades which can be quite strong. I think that, for instance, a very, very smart friend of mine once said, “I just can’t imagine the conscious robot.” I said, “No, that’s not true. You can imaging the conscious robot just fine. You’ve seen Star Wars. You’ve seen C3PO and R2D2. Certainly you imagined they were conscious. You can imagine the conscious robot just fine. You think you shouldn’t imagine the conscious. You don’t want to take it seriously but it’s not hard to do. For that matter, you can imagine a conscious choo choo train or a conscious tea kettle. You can. So don't tell me that I can’t imagine that. Just admit that what you really are saying is you don’t want to imagine it. You think that you’re committing some sort of confused act if you do it. But it’s easy enough to do."
In Their Own Words is recorded in Big Think's studio.
Image courtesy of Shutterstock
Famous physicists like Richard Feynman think 137 holds the answers to the Universe.
- The fine structure constant has mystified scientists since the 1800s.
- The number 1/137 might hold the clues to the Grand Unified Theory.
- Relativity, electromagnetism and quantum mechanics are unified by the number.
Younger Americans support expanding the Supreme Court and serious political reforms, says new poll.
- Americans under 40 largely favor major political reforms, finds a new survey.
- The poll revealed that most would want to expand the Supreme Court, impose terms limits, and make it easier to vote.
- Millennials are more liberal and reform-centered than Generation Z.
A 2020 study published in the journal of Psychological Science explores the idea that fake news can actually help you remember real facts better.
- In 2019, researchers at Stanford Engineering analyzed the spread of fake news as if it were a strain of Ebola. They adapted a model for understanding diseases that can infect a person more than once to better understand how fake news spreads and gains traction.
- A new study published in 2020 explores the idea that fake news can actually help you remember real facts better.
- "These findings demonstrate one situation in which misinformation reminders can diminish the negative effects of fake-news exposure in the short term," researchers on the project explained.
Previous studies on misinformation have already paved the way to a better understanding<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDU1NzQ4NC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYxNjE2Mjg1Nn0.hs_xHktN1KXUDVoWpHIVBI2sMJy6aRK6tvBVFkqmYjk/img.jpg?width=1245&coordinates=0%2C800%2C0%2C823&height=700" id="fc135" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="246bb1920c0f40ccb15e123914de1ab1" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="fake news concept of misinformation and fake news in the media" />
How does misinformation spread?
Credit: Visual Generation on Shutterstock<p><strong>What is the "continued-influence" effect?</strong></p><p>A challenge in using corrections effectively is that repeating the misinformation can have negative consequences. Research on this effect (referred to as "continued-influence") has shown that information presented as factual that is later deemed false can still contaminate memory and reasoning. The persistence of the continued-influence effect has led researchers to generally recommend avoiding repeating misinformation. </p><p>"Repetition increases familiarity and believability of misinformation," <a href="https://engineering.stanford.edu/magazine/article/how-fake-news-spreads-real-virus" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">the study explains</a>.</p><p><strong>What is the "familiarity-backfire" effect?</strong></p><p>Studies of this effect have shown that increasing misinformation familiarity through extra exposure to it leads to misattributions of fluency when the context of said information cannot be recalled. <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0956797620952797#" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">A 2017 study</a> examined this effect in myth correction. Subjects rated beliefs in facts and myths of unclear veracity. Then, the facts were affirmed and myths corrected and subjects again made belief ratings. The results suggested a role for familiarity but the myth beliefs remained below pre-manipulation levels. </p>