The Cultural Factors Driving America's Departure From Reality

[Siro]

Sup dude?

He's upset Boris and Dutch are being attacked because they're "thought provokers". And he doesn't like Red.

 

[Scat]

When the prominent poster in a thread is the OP...

 

[DutchJazzer]

He's upset Boris and Dutch are being attacked because they're "thought provokers". And he doesn't like Red.

i am no thought provoker, i am a ***** magnet!

 

[Red]

This is probably the most problematic piece I've encountered from the Atlantic. There's a huge literature out there on the development of the Epistemological Crisis we find ourselves in, and I will save this particular piece in the subfile titled "really bad reiterations of the subjective-objective dichotomy: how much of this **** will we now have to suffer through?"

I disagree with much of his historicizing; he doesn't bother to outline a theory of truth; he identifies the wrong bogeymen on pretty much every scale; he totally butchers several lines of thought emerging from the 60s; etc. A truly bad moment for the Atlantic.

There's a great deal I take exception to in Andersen's Atlantic piece, and much of it does revolve around his interpretation of influences, trends, and ideas born in the 60's and early 70's. That said, I've always thought Truth was a standard to aim for. And we seem to be in a period where alternative facts are being set up as somehow equally valid as truths. Not that truth, in any subject or situation is that easy to discern. There is history as it happened, and history as it's written, and as it's written can introduce relativism. But, shall we get to the point that the alternate fact supported by the Flat Earth Society is equally as valid as believing the Earth is a globe?

 

[Red]

just read this. Good idea.

I'm sure you're right, but I could not resist pointing out how Dutch's comment identified him as a fake libertarian.

 

[Red]

When the prominent poster in a thread is the OP...

To post the thread with the information I wanted to post required 3 comments to start, or else one gigantic comment. I went with the former. The third posting dealt with one example of the overall topic, the rise of fake news and alternative media narratives in 21st century America. That article showed the close parallels between the Alt Right and Alt Left, both are essentially anti-globalist for example, and had a balance that might make it of value to anyone, regardless of where a person fell on the political spectrum.

I never expected that the thread would get dozens or hundreds of comments. But, we are living in an age where fake news, alternative facts, and alternative media outlets vie with mainstream media outlets, and these trends are important in the history we are living through

 

[Red]

My thanks to whichever mod corrected the spelling error in the subject line....

 

[NAOS]

There's a great deal I take exception to in Andersen's Atlantic piece, and much of it does revolve around his interpretation of influences, trends, and ideas born in the 60's and early 70's. That said, I've always thought Truth was a standard to aim for. And we seem to be in a period where alternative facts are being set up as somehow equally valid as truths. Not that truth, in any subject or situation is that easy to discern. There is history as it happened, and history as it's written, and as it's written can introduce relativism. But, shall we get to the point that the alternate fact supported by the Flat Earth Society is equally as valid as believing the Earth is a globe?

I don't disagree with the problem; I've consistently wrung my hands over epistemological problem and rampant relativism as soon as I understood the forces in play and their apparent intractability. We've been accelerating within those orbits, no doubt. But one thing I definitely won't settle for is some facile or wistful view about the past and its easier relationship to truth. Nor will I be around while the mass culture takes 10 full steps back on the subjectivity-objectivity problem -- and where the "left" is pounding the streets on the side of rationality and objectivity in way Andersen does here. Especially if that means largely misidentifying the bogeymen and butchering the huge breakthroughs toward truth that emerged from the 20th century.

Andersen has identified a problem that many cultural critics have identified. Good for him? He then proceeds to botch just about every other aspect of the project (I'll give him a pass on the contemporary stuff that fills his piece, but, again, most of that is far from the cutting edge of cultural criticism).

 

[DutchJazzer]

I'm sure you're right, but I could not resist pointing out how Dutch's comment identified him as a fake libertarian.

how am i a fake libertarian you never took a gander at the libertarian ideals, and their are different kind.

but i have read socialist masterpieces from marx his books, to hitlers mein kampf and mouslinini manifesto!
true socialist communistic masterpieces!

 

[Jonah]

I don't disagree with the problem; I've consistently wrung my hands over epistemological problem and rampant relativism as soon as I understood the forces in play and their apparent intractability. We've been accelerating within those orbits, no doubt. But one thing I definitely won't settle for is some facile or wistful view about the past and its easier relationship to truth. Nor will I be around while the mass culture takes 10 full steps back on the subjectivity-objectivity problem -- and where the "left" is pounding the streets on the side of rationality and objectivity in way Andersen does here. Especially if that means largely misidentifying the bogeymen and butchering the huge breakthroughs toward truth that emerged from the 20th century.

Andersen has identified a problem that many cultural critics have identified. Good for him? He then proceeds to botch just about every other aspect of the project (I'll give him a pass on the contemporary stuff that fills his piece, but, again, most of that is far from the cutting edge of cultural criticism).

One or two names or links to the critics you have in mind would be appreciated.

 

[Boris]

I don't disagree with the problem; I've consistently wrung my hands over epistemological problem and rampant relativism as soon as I understood the forces in play and their apparent intractability. We've been accelerating within those orbits, no doubt. But one thing I definitely won't settle for is some facile or wistful view about the past and its easier relationship to truth. Nor will I be around while the mass culture takes 10 full steps back on the subjectivity-objectivity problem -- and where the "left" is pounding the streets on the side of rationality and objectivity in way Andersen does here. Especially if that means largely misidentifying the bogeymen and butchering the huge breakthroughs toward truth that emerged from the 20th century.

Andersen has identified a problem that many cultural critics have identified. Good for him? He then proceeds to botch just about every other aspect of the project (I'll give him a pass on the contemporary stuff that fills his piece, but, again, most of that is far from the cutting edge of cultural criticism).

Easy peesy. We have a tendency to treat news like Knowledge by Acquaintance rather then Knowledge by Description. Meaning you think yer familiar with a topic like yer familiar with a person. In other languages they have differnt. Terms fer knowin someone an knowin somethink. English don't. We treat are news like tha subject matter is someone we know not somethink we actually comprehend.

 

[Red]

Well, here's the thing from where I stand...

Kelly Anne Conway was the first administration official to use the phrase "alternative facts". But if we see that as an effort to create an equivalency between truth and fiction, fact and falsehood, it's difficult to see how that really helps the body politic.

And it's happening at a time where, as a nation, we may be more divided since the Civil War.

I have a close friend, who declined my offer to view the Vice News footage of the Friday night torch led parade in Charlottesville. The reason he gave was "the media lies. I don't have to watch it. It's fake". Even telling him that a white nationalist leader had invited Vice News to film him made no difference. It was fake, and he did not have to watch it to know it was fake.

This is happening everywhere, to the extent there are now two sets of realities. With two narratives of current events in America. I am sorry if I have to look at people like Trump, Spicer, Conway, etc. as the drivers of an effort to create an alternative world that seems detached from the real world. That's my bias, but it sure seems like that is what is happening. It sure seems like creating this equivalency can be laid at their feet at this time.

If we want two Americas unable to communicate with each other, that's one way to go about ensuring those two Americas will grow further apart and not communicate. Not only is that detrimental, but it's difficult to see how we can fail to recognize how injurious to our political and societal health that can be. And that's why I started this thread. If I reach even a handful of people interested and able to agree we should be concerned with creating an equivalency tween fact and fiction, that's good enough for me.