1 00:00:05,160 --> 00:00:09,600 Speaker 1: How do we find truth in media? Why do cameras 2 00:00:09,680 --> 00:00:12,120 Speaker 1: not tell us what we think they do, whether that's 3 00:00:12,119 --> 00:00:16,720 Speaker 1: from war photographers or police officers. What is important about 4 00:00:16,760 --> 00:00:20,239 Speaker 1: the history of pamphleteering and what does any of this 5 00:00:20,320 --> 00:00:23,720 Speaker 1: have to do with agriculture in the USSR or book 6 00:00:23,760 --> 00:00:28,200 Speaker 1: banning in America or dog whistles or phone apps that 7 00:00:28,360 --> 00:00:32,360 Speaker 1: only tell facts? Why is it so hard to understand 8 00:00:32,400 --> 00:00:40,320 Speaker 1: the viewpoints of millions of brains at once. Welcome to 9 00:00:40,400 --> 00:00:44,280 Speaker 1: Inner Cosmos with me David Eagleman. I'm a neuroscientist and 10 00:00:44,320 --> 00:00:47,600 Speaker 1: an author at Stanford, and in these episodes we sail 11 00:00:47,640 --> 00:00:51,360 Speaker 1: deeply into our three pound universe to understand why and 12 00:00:51,520 --> 00:01:03,840 Speaker 1: how our lives look the way they do. Today's episode 13 00:01:03,920 --> 00:01:08,280 Speaker 1: is about truth in media? What is the truth? We 14 00:01:08,360 --> 00:01:11,800 Speaker 1: all know about fake news, and we've all been living 15 00:01:11,800 --> 00:01:17,560 Speaker 1: with concern about the ease with which misinformation and disinformation spreads. 16 00:01:17,640 --> 00:01:20,959 Speaker 1: We see this in social media feeds that become social 17 00:01:21,000 --> 00:01:23,440 Speaker 1: echo chambers. We see this when people are likely to 18 00:01:23,440 --> 00:01:27,759 Speaker 1: believe information that confirms their existing beliefs, and they're less 19 00:01:27,880 --> 00:01:32,880 Speaker 1: likely to be exposed to opposing viewpoints. People generally seek 20 00:01:32,959 --> 00:01:37,320 Speaker 1: information from sources that agree with them and therefore they're 21 00:01:37,319 --> 00:01:40,000 Speaker 1: not even aware of the full picture. That can be 22 00:01:40,560 --> 00:01:44,480 Speaker 1: dangerous as it leads people to making decisions based on 23 00:01:45,040 --> 00:01:50,640 Speaker 1: false information sometimes. So against this background, I started receiving 24 00:01:50,800 --> 00:01:56,400 Speaker 1: calls from various academic colleagues back in twenty twenty, and 25 00:01:56,440 --> 00:01:59,080 Speaker 1: they told me they wanted to submit a grant to 26 00:01:59,160 --> 00:02:03,560 Speaker 1: the National Science Foundation to get funding to figure out 27 00:02:03,680 --> 00:02:09,760 Speaker 1: or propose how to get truth back into the media. 28 00:02:09,960 --> 00:02:11,920 Speaker 1: And they were asking me if I would be a 29 00:02:12,080 --> 00:02:15,960 Speaker 1: part of their grant. Specifically, they were worried about this 30 00:02:16,160 --> 00:02:21,280 Speaker 1: spread of misinformation and disinformation. They saw so many tweets 31 00:02:21,280 --> 00:02:24,799 Speaker 1: that had assertions in them, and sometimes these were out 32 00:02:24,840 --> 00:02:28,080 Speaker 1: and out lies, but much more often something they felt 33 00:02:28,160 --> 00:02:30,840 Speaker 1: was a twisting of the truth, a spin that they 34 00:02:30,840 --> 00:02:34,200 Speaker 1: didn't quite like. And so they felt, why can't we 35 00:02:34,440 --> 00:02:37,640 Speaker 1: use the tools of science to figure out how to 36 00:02:37,680 --> 00:02:42,720 Speaker 1: make social media or a news organization simply tell the truth? 37 00:02:43,320 --> 00:02:46,920 Speaker 1: What algorithms could you put into place, What system for 38 00:02:47,160 --> 00:02:52,520 Speaker 1: checking veracity could you implement? Now? I was flattered that 39 00:02:52,560 --> 00:02:56,840 Speaker 1: they called, but I challenged them on their fundamental assumption. 40 00:02:57,040 --> 00:03:01,960 Speaker 1: I asked them, what do you mean by truth? Because 41 00:03:02,000 --> 00:03:05,120 Speaker 1: what I was afraid of is they meant their truth, 42 00:03:05,639 --> 00:03:08,040 Speaker 1: and a little bit of probing turned out to reveal 43 00:03:08,080 --> 00:03:11,079 Speaker 1: that for the most part that was the case. Whatever 44 00:03:11,200 --> 00:03:15,520 Speaker 1: they happened to believe politically, that was the truth, and 45 00:03:15,600 --> 00:03:18,280 Speaker 1: whatever the other side of the political spectrum was saying 46 00:03:18,680 --> 00:03:22,760 Speaker 1: was simply untrue, whether that was by ignorance or deception 47 00:03:23,120 --> 00:03:25,880 Speaker 1: or malice on the part of those other people making 48 00:03:25,880 --> 00:03:30,520 Speaker 1: those other tweets. And so I'm making these next three 49 00:03:30,560 --> 00:03:34,080 Speaker 1: episodes about truth, and I want to be clear that 50 00:03:34,120 --> 00:03:37,400 Speaker 1: I'm not pumping for any particular political side here. No 51 00:03:38,000 --> 00:03:42,160 Speaker 1: side of the spectrum gets favored here. Instead, I'm looking 52 00:03:42,200 --> 00:03:44,680 Speaker 1: at this as a neuroscientist. I'm looking at this in 53 00:03:44,760 --> 00:03:48,560 Speaker 1: terms of human behavior. What I'm interested in are the 54 00:03:48,640 --> 00:03:53,120 Speaker 1: illusions and cognitive biases that we are all subject to. 55 00:03:54,360 --> 00:03:58,119 Speaker 1: So let me start very generally about how we all 56 00:03:58,200 --> 00:04:01,520 Speaker 1: come to believe our own truths. So I did an 57 00:04:01,560 --> 00:04:05,000 Speaker 1: earlier episode on this where I asked the question, why 58 00:04:05,040 --> 00:04:08,800 Speaker 1: do we all believe that we see the truth? Clearly? 59 00:04:08,880 --> 00:04:13,560 Speaker 1: Wherever you look on the political spectrum, each person feels, look, 60 00:04:13,760 --> 00:04:16,520 Speaker 1: I know the truth, and I just don't understand why 61 00:04:16,640 --> 00:04:21,159 Speaker 1: other people can't see the truth that's so clearly arrayed 62 00:04:21,200 --> 00:04:24,120 Speaker 1: in front of us. All. My only explanation is that 63 00:04:24,160 --> 00:04:29,839 Speaker 1: they must be trolls, or misinformed, or Russian bots, or stubborn, 64 00:04:30,040 --> 00:04:33,000 Speaker 1: or just doing what their friends are doing without thinking 65 00:04:33,080 --> 00:04:37,039 Speaker 1: about it very deeply, or whatever. But what's clear is 66 00:04:37,080 --> 00:04:40,080 Speaker 1: that there is a true answer, and I see it, 67 00:04:40,320 --> 00:04:42,800 Speaker 1: and if I could just shout loudly enough in all 68 00:04:42,920 --> 00:04:46,680 Speaker 1: caps on Twitter, everyone would come to agree with me. 69 00:04:47,600 --> 00:04:51,120 Speaker 1: So that is how we generally feel about everything in 70 00:04:51,200 --> 00:04:55,800 Speaker 1: our world of political opinions. But that's rarely made explicit. 71 00:04:56,560 --> 00:04:59,400 Speaker 1: And in my next book, called Empire of the Invisible, 72 00:04:59,640 --> 00:05:04,080 Speaker 1: I call this the illusion of complete knowledge, which is 73 00:05:04,080 --> 00:05:08,320 Speaker 1: to say, we each feel that we believe our internal 74 00:05:08,360 --> 00:05:13,520 Speaker 1: model is essentially correct and complete. But the fact is 75 00:05:14,000 --> 00:05:17,640 Speaker 1: that we each follow a very thin trajectory through space 76 00:05:17,680 --> 00:05:21,720 Speaker 1: and time, and that forms your beliefs, and you grow 77 00:05:21,800 --> 00:05:24,640 Speaker 1: up in a particular house, in a particular neighborhood, and 78 00:05:24,680 --> 00:05:29,279 Speaker 1: a particular culture, and that shapes what you think is true. 79 00:05:29,839 --> 00:05:35,400 Speaker 1: There's a great quotation from Oliver Wendell Holmes Senior, who wrote, quote, 80 00:05:36,120 --> 00:05:39,839 Speaker 1: we are all tattooed in our cradles with the beliefs 81 00:05:39,880 --> 00:05:43,479 Speaker 1: of our tribe. The record may seem superficial, but it 82 00:05:43,520 --> 00:05:48,039 Speaker 1: is indelible unquote. The end result is that each of 83 00:05:48,120 --> 00:05:51,080 Speaker 1: us ends up with an internal model in our heads 84 00:05:51,480 --> 00:05:57,000 Speaker 1: that is woefully incomplete, but we each believe, Yeah, I 85 00:05:57,120 --> 00:05:59,479 Speaker 1: read the right news stories, and I see the right 86 00:05:59,480 --> 00:06:03,160 Speaker 1: tweets and watch the right TikTok videos, and so I 87 00:06:03,360 --> 00:06:07,720 Speaker 1: know what is correct. Now, if you want to hear 88 00:06:07,760 --> 00:06:10,560 Speaker 1: more on how we come to derive our notion of 89 00:06:10,600 --> 00:06:13,520 Speaker 1: the truth, please listen to episode sixteen, which is titled 90 00:06:14,040 --> 00:06:18,680 Speaker 1: why is everyone who disagrees with you? Misinformed? But today, 91 00:06:18,960 --> 00:06:21,640 Speaker 1: what I want to concentrate on is the next step, 92 00:06:22,360 --> 00:06:25,240 Speaker 1: which is that these colleagues were calling me and asking 93 00:06:25,680 --> 00:06:29,600 Speaker 1: how to get truth back in the media, and that 94 00:06:29,640 --> 00:06:34,560 Speaker 1: really got me thinking about this old and fundamental philosophical question, 95 00:06:35,200 --> 00:06:39,719 Speaker 1: is there such a thing as the truth? So for 96 00:06:39,800 --> 00:06:44,920 Speaker 1: clear definitions, let's agree that for decidable propositions, there is 97 00:06:45,040 --> 00:06:48,560 Speaker 1: an objective truth. But what I'm probing for the rest 98 00:06:48,600 --> 00:06:51,800 Speaker 1: of this episode is the local version of truth, the 99 00:06:51,880 --> 00:06:59,040 Speaker 1: question of whether our subjective truths approximate or even can approximate, 100 00:06:59,400 --> 00:07:03,600 Speaker 1: the object truth, and why we each believe that we 101 00:07:03,680 --> 00:07:07,440 Speaker 1: have an advantage with this. Now, if you have been 102 00:07:07,480 --> 00:07:10,000 Speaker 1: listening to this podcast for a while, you probably know 103 00:07:10,120 --> 00:07:15,040 Speaker 1: that I am pathologically optimistic, but I'm a little bit 104 00:07:15,080 --> 00:07:19,280 Speaker 1: cynical about this notion of finding truth. I think the 105 00:07:19,840 --> 00:07:23,160 Speaker 1: search for truth for most people is really just a 106 00:07:23,400 --> 00:07:27,640 Speaker 1: search for confirmation of what they already believe. And so 107 00:07:27,680 --> 00:07:30,360 Speaker 1: I want to give a very clear argument about why 108 00:07:30,400 --> 00:07:35,120 Speaker 1: this notion of finding truth is mostly illusory and why 109 00:07:35,160 --> 00:07:38,640 Speaker 1: it typically just means I want to see my version 110 00:07:38,640 --> 00:07:41,600 Speaker 1: of the truth in print. And I want to argue 111 00:07:41,640 --> 00:07:43,520 Speaker 1: why I think we would be better off as a 112 00:07:43,560 --> 00:07:47,400 Speaker 1: society if we were able to distance ourselves a little 113 00:07:47,440 --> 00:07:51,960 Speaker 1: bit from this illusion. So let's begin with a fundamental 114 00:07:52,000 --> 00:07:55,560 Speaker 1: point which will help us frame everything, and that question 115 00:07:55,680 --> 00:07:59,640 Speaker 1: is is all this fake news and the misinformation and 116 00:07:59,640 --> 00:08:04,840 Speaker 1: distant information? Is this new? Because nowadays we discuss this 117 00:08:04,960 --> 00:08:08,640 Speaker 1: all the time, these concerns about the ease with which 118 00:08:08,720 --> 00:08:12,840 Speaker 1: disinformation spreads, the problem of fake news and echo chambers, 119 00:08:13,280 --> 00:08:16,040 Speaker 1: and so the background assumption which I hear a lot 120 00:08:16,320 --> 00:08:19,679 Speaker 1: is that people used to be better about the truth. 121 00:08:20,240 --> 00:08:22,520 Speaker 1: You could turn on the news and you would know 122 00:08:23,120 --> 00:08:26,200 Speaker 1: that the folks there were telling you the truth. I 123 00:08:26,280 --> 00:08:28,880 Speaker 1: recently heard someone argue that back in the old days, 124 00:08:29,320 --> 00:08:32,960 Speaker 1: everyone got their news from the same source, from watching 125 00:08:33,240 --> 00:08:39,599 Speaker 1: Walter Cronkite speak on television, but that is patently untrue. 126 00:08:39,880 --> 00:08:44,800 Speaker 1: This is simply retrospective romanticization, and it's important for us 127 00:08:44,840 --> 00:08:49,240 Speaker 1: to see why. So let's start with newspapers from let's 128 00:08:49,240 --> 00:08:52,439 Speaker 1: say fifty years ago. The first time I was exposed 129 00:08:52,559 --> 00:08:56,400 Speaker 1: to newspapers was in my grandparents' generation, and I learned 130 00:08:56,440 --> 00:09:00,200 Speaker 1: that in every major city there were at least two newspapers, 131 00:09:00,640 --> 00:09:04,400 Speaker 1: one that aligned with your political views, and the others 132 00:09:04,480 --> 00:09:07,480 Speaker 1: were the rags that you would never deign to pick up. 133 00:09:08,040 --> 00:09:12,120 Speaker 1: The different newspapers in any city had diverse angles and 134 00:09:12,440 --> 00:09:17,439 Speaker 1: non equivalent coverage for the politics and war, economy, and whatever. 135 00:09:18,160 --> 00:09:23,520 Speaker 1: The newspapers appealed to different audiences, and from an economic angle, 136 00:09:23,559 --> 00:09:27,040 Speaker 1: this is the only reason why you could have multiple newspapers, 137 00:09:27,080 --> 00:09:29,240 Speaker 1: because if they were saying the same things and had 138 00:09:29,280 --> 00:09:32,120 Speaker 1: the same opinions and appealed to the same market, there 139 00:09:32,160 --> 00:09:37,680 Speaker 1: would be no reason for more than one. And beyond newspapers, 140 00:09:37,760 --> 00:09:42,280 Speaker 1: there was a surprising proliferation of rags. Just do a 141 00:09:42,320 --> 00:09:46,800 Speaker 1: Google image search on National Inquirer headlines and you'll see 142 00:09:46,800 --> 00:09:50,160 Speaker 1: thousands of stories of people who are kidnapped by space 143 00:09:50,200 --> 00:09:55,480 Speaker 1: aliens or a mermaid cemetery discovered, or Hillary Clinton adopts 144 00:09:55,480 --> 00:10:00,160 Speaker 1: an alien baby. And there were many, many rag newspapers. 145 00:10:00,360 --> 00:10:03,480 Speaker 1: I'll give you just one example, the English paper The 146 00:10:03,679 --> 00:10:07,200 Speaker 1: Sun in nineteen eighty nine, and note this was before 147 00:10:07,280 --> 00:10:11,240 Speaker 1: the Internet. The Sun covered a disaster at the Hillsboro 148 00:10:11,320 --> 00:10:15,800 Speaker 1: football Stadium in England in which the South Yorkshire Police 149 00:10:15,840 --> 00:10:18,920 Speaker 1: made a bunch of wrong decisions about crowd control and 150 00:10:19,080 --> 00:10:23,800 Speaker 1: ninety seven people died in a human crush, and most 151 00:10:23,800 --> 00:10:26,280 Speaker 1: of the newspapers pointed out that it was the fault 152 00:10:26,400 --> 00:10:30,880 Speaker 1: of the police doing crowd control, but the Sun newspaper reported, 153 00:10:30,960 --> 00:10:35,000 Speaker 1: under a huge headline that read the truth that people 154 00:10:35,000 --> 00:10:37,680 Speaker 1: were scapegoating the police and that the real cause of 155 00:10:37,760 --> 00:10:42,400 Speaker 1: the disaster was unruly Liverpool fans. They had caused the 156 00:10:42,400 --> 00:10:45,840 Speaker 1: whole thing. So I'll skip all the lawsuits and hearings 157 00:10:45,840 --> 00:10:48,600 Speaker 1: that resulted from all this, but this coverage from the 158 00:10:48,640 --> 00:10:52,280 Speaker 1: Sun was shown to be the fakest of fake news, 159 00:10:52,280 --> 00:10:54,960 Speaker 1: and the paper later called it the most terrible blunder 160 00:10:55,000 --> 00:10:58,080 Speaker 1: in its history. I raised this as one of the 161 00:10:58,400 --> 00:11:02,440 Speaker 1: countless examples of the way that news ran wild in 162 00:11:02,480 --> 00:11:05,840 Speaker 1: all directions well before the Internet. And I'll come back 163 00:11:05,840 --> 00:11:08,679 Speaker 1: to this topic next week. But the point for now 164 00:11:09,160 --> 00:11:12,160 Speaker 1: is that fake news has always been around, and in 165 00:11:12,200 --> 00:11:14,800 Speaker 1: many senses it can be argued that it was more 166 00:11:14,880 --> 00:11:19,040 Speaker 1: important in damaging than it is now, precisely because if 167 00:11:19,080 --> 00:11:22,800 Speaker 1: there were fewer places to get one's news, each venue 168 00:11:22,920 --> 00:11:26,120 Speaker 1: had more eyeballs. In other words, if I start some 169 00:11:26,520 --> 00:11:29,160 Speaker 1: website now and write some fake news on it, maybe 170 00:11:29,160 --> 00:11:32,240 Speaker 1: I'll get one hundred or one thousand views, but that's 171 00:11:32,360 --> 00:11:36,520 Speaker 1: very different than having a million viewers for the Sun newspaper. 172 00:11:37,679 --> 00:11:41,479 Speaker 1: So the idea that everyone got their news from cronkite 173 00:11:41,520 --> 00:11:44,839 Speaker 1: on television has no basis. In reality, people got most 174 00:11:44,880 --> 00:11:49,199 Speaker 1: of their news from newspapers and rag newspapers, and also 175 00:11:49,920 --> 00:11:54,720 Speaker 1: from pamphlets. Pamphleteering was a big thing that doesn't exist 176 00:11:54,800 --> 00:11:57,880 Speaker 1: much anymore, but anyone who is my age or older 177 00:11:57,960 --> 00:12:02,079 Speaker 1: might remember seeing these things. As a kid, you'd write 178 00:12:02,080 --> 00:12:05,200 Speaker 1: your address on a list and a pamphlet would get 179 00:12:05,200 --> 00:12:09,479 Speaker 1: mailed to your inbox. Snail mailed no different than subscribing 180 00:12:09,520 --> 00:12:13,040 Speaker 1: to a newsletter and getting that in your electronic inbox. 181 00:12:14,320 --> 00:12:17,439 Speaker 1: And I remember as a kid finding a pamphlet from 182 00:12:17,480 --> 00:12:20,240 Speaker 1: the American Nazi Party on the ground, and it was 183 00:12:20,240 --> 00:12:23,600 Speaker 1: full of the most horrific things about Blacks and Jews 184 00:12:23,600 --> 00:12:26,960 Speaker 1: and Hispanics and so on. But that's how people would 185 00:12:27,000 --> 00:12:29,920 Speaker 1: get their news. You would sign up for whatever fit 186 00:12:30,040 --> 00:12:33,439 Speaker 1: your political model and what you wanted to arrive in 187 00:12:33,520 --> 00:12:37,240 Speaker 1: your inbox. The point is you could get any kind 188 00:12:37,240 --> 00:12:41,640 Speaker 1: of misinformation or disinformation that you wanted. There was no 189 00:12:41,920 --> 00:12:45,199 Speaker 1: difference between that pamphlet and something you might read on 190 00:12:45,600 --> 00:12:50,040 Speaker 1: four chan or some website or watch on TikTok. And 191 00:12:50,120 --> 00:12:54,720 Speaker 1: let's address this question of echo chambers. Beyond newspapers and 192 00:12:54,760 --> 00:12:59,000 Speaker 1: pamphlets and so on, we all watched disinformation spread in 193 00:12:59,160 --> 00:13:04,439 Speaker 1: real life from flesh and blood friends who repeated factually 194 00:13:04,559 --> 00:13:09,640 Speaker 1: incorrect stories purposefully or on accident. And because we're very 195 00:13:09,760 --> 00:13:13,640 Speaker 1: social creatures, we tend to listen to those people around us, 196 00:13:13,679 --> 00:13:17,480 Speaker 1: whether in our family or our neighborhood, or our college 197 00:13:17,559 --> 00:13:21,320 Speaker 1: friends or our culture. More generally, that's where we get 198 00:13:21,360 --> 00:13:26,080 Speaker 1: our information, and that is what shapes our limited model 199 00:13:26,200 --> 00:13:29,800 Speaker 1: of the world. So there's nothing new about echo chambers. 200 00:13:29,880 --> 00:13:33,720 Speaker 1: Humans have never needed social media for that to happen. 201 00:13:34,320 --> 00:13:35,920 Speaker 1: I remember when I was a little kid, I was 202 00:13:35,960 --> 00:13:39,360 Speaker 1: talking with my grandmother about an election that had just 203 00:13:39,480 --> 00:13:44,720 Speaker 1: concluded in her state, and she said, dumbfounded. I don't 204 00:13:44,760 --> 00:13:48,680 Speaker 1: know a single person who voted for that man, and 205 00:13:48,800 --> 00:13:51,880 Speaker 1: she was telling the truth. She didn't have acquaintance with 206 00:13:52,200 --> 00:13:56,440 Speaker 1: anyone who felt differently than she did, even though that 207 00:13:56,559 --> 00:14:01,000 Speaker 1: was obviously over half her state. From time, I'm immemorial, 208 00:14:01,080 --> 00:14:05,520 Speaker 1: we always hang out with people who think generally like us, 209 00:14:05,880 --> 00:14:10,240 Speaker 1: and so whenever our candidate loses an election, we immediately 210 00:14:10,280 --> 00:14:13,439 Speaker 1: cook up excuses. People don't know who to vote for. 211 00:14:13,920 --> 00:14:17,400 Speaker 1: They were intimidated into voting for him. The election was rigged, 212 00:14:17,840 --> 00:14:20,600 Speaker 1: They were tricked into voting for him. There are so 213 00:14:20,680 --> 00:14:23,800 Speaker 1: many dumb young people or old people, or poor people 214 00:14:23,840 --> 00:14:26,240 Speaker 1: or rich people who have no idea how to see 215 00:14:26,280 --> 00:14:31,320 Speaker 1: through his deception. We are all veteran experts at offering 216 00:14:31,400 --> 00:14:36,960 Speaker 1: up explanations every time our candidate doesn't win. So in 217 00:14:37,080 --> 00:14:40,880 Speaker 1: most discussions that I'm in, social media takes most of 218 00:14:40,920 --> 00:14:43,640 Speaker 1: the heat for the fake news, But perhaps the question 219 00:14:43,720 --> 00:14:47,760 Speaker 1: we need to ask is whether there's something new about 220 00:14:47,760 --> 00:14:51,960 Speaker 1: the behaviors that arise in social media, or instead whether 221 00:14:52,080 --> 00:14:56,640 Speaker 1: fake news always emerges from thousands or millions of human 222 00:14:56,680 --> 00:15:01,200 Speaker 1: brains interacting with one another. Next week's episode, I'm going 223 00:15:01,240 --> 00:15:03,760 Speaker 1: to dive deeper into the issue of truth in social 224 00:15:03,800 --> 00:15:07,480 Speaker 1: media and why the Internet may actually be enormously helpful 225 00:15:07,520 --> 00:15:10,640 Speaker 1: for exposing the truth. Wait for next week's argument. You 226 00:15:10,720 --> 00:15:14,400 Speaker 1: might be pleasantly surprised by it, but for now, let 227 00:15:14,400 --> 00:15:18,160 Speaker 1: me just emphasize that it is illusory to believe that 228 00:15:18,320 --> 00:15:23,400 Speaker 1: people in previous generations did not suffer the same biases 229 00:15:23,560 --> 00:15:27,800 Speaker 1: in their fact gathering and meaning making. Let's not get 230 00:15:27,840 --> 00:15:32,960 Speaker 1: trapped in a romanticization of earlier eras, because it limits 231 00:15:33,120 --> 00:15:36,440 Speaker 1: our ability to see the bigger picture about human behavior, 232 00:15:36,960 --> 00:15:42,000 Speaker 1: and instead it misdirects our attention to Zucker, TikTok or 233 00:15:42,160 --> 00:15:45,440 Speaker 1: musk as though that's the core problem and if they 234 00:15:45,520 --> 00:15:51,240 Speaker 1: didn't exist, everyone would be happily obtaining only true news, 235 00:15:51,360 --> 00:15:56,440 Speaker 1: just like we used to do back in some illusory time. Now, 236 00:15:56,480 --> 00:15:59,280 Speaker 1: from a neuroscience angle, why do we think that the 237 00:15:59,320 --> 00:16:02,120 Speaker 1: truth used to be clearer? It's mostly because we have 238 00:16:02,680 --> 00:16:06,840 Speaker 1: terrible memories. I mentioned in an earlier episode that I 239 00:16:06,880 --> 00:16:11,240 Speaker 1: saw a bumper sticker that said make America America again, 240 00:16:11,640 --> 00:16:14,840 Speaker 1: and everyone seemed to like that sticker from whatever side 241 00:16:14,840 --> 00:16:19,920 Speaker 1: of the political spectrum. Because we each have impoverished memories, 242 00:16:19,960 --> 00:16:23,360 Speaker 1: and we believe that when we were a kid and 243 00:16:23,440 --> 00:16:27,240 Speaker 1: not really paying attention to politics. Everything was simpler and 244 00:16:27,280 --> 00:16:31,880 Speaker 1: everyone generally agreed with one another. But it's only because 245 00:16:31,920 --> 00:16:35,280 Speaker 1: we were children and not generally thinking about the kind 246 00:16:35,320 --> 00:16:40,000 Speaker 1: of polarization that happens in a society to generate events 247 00:16:40,160 --> 00:16:44,640 Speaker 1: like the Chinese Communist Revolution or the Russian Revolution, or 248 00:16:44,720 --> 00:16:49,960 Speaker 1: Nazism in Germany, or fascism in Italy, or polepot in Cambodia, 249 00:16:50,160 --> 00:16:53,480 Speaker 1: or the massacre of the Tutsi in Rwanda, or on 250 00:16:53,560 --> 00:16:56,360 Speaker 1: and on, looking at what has just happened in the 251 00:16:56,400 --> 00:17:01,720 Speaker 1: past century, all before the existence of the Internet. So 252 00:17:02,080 --> 00:17:03,760 Speaker 1: that's the first point I want to make. We have 253 00:17:04,000 --> 00:17:08,560 Speaker 1: terrible memories about whether things were truthy in the past, 254 00:17:08,600 --> 00:17:11,840 Speaker 1: and we tend to always think they were. And in 255 00:17:11,880 --> 00:17:14,440 Speaker 1: an upcoming episode, I'm going to cover a great new 256 00:17:14,520 --> 00:17:19,080 Speaker 1: Nature paper about why we think that morality is declining, 257 00:17:19,440 --> 00:17:23,720 Speaker 1: which it turns out people erroneously believe in every generation 258 00:17:24,200 --> 00:17:27,040 Speaker 1: and have for about two thousand years, and we will 259 00:17:27,040 --> 00:17:31,439 Speaker 1: see it's exactly the same issue, very bad memories. But 260 00:17:31,560 --> 00:17:34,479 Speaker 1: all I want to emphasize for today's episode is this 261 00:17:34,680 --> 00:17:38,760 Speaker 1: fact that the concern about truth is not new, but 262 00:17:38,840 --> 00:17:43,760 Speaker 1: as we will unpack further, very very old So, returning 263 00:17:43,800 --> 00:17:46,520 Speaker 1: to the present time, I said no to all these 264 00:17:46,520 --> 00:17:51,240 Speaker 1: invitations to collaborate on National Science Foundation grants because I 265 00:17:51,280 --> 00:17:55,600 Speaker 1: thought the endeavor was misguided. The heart of the problem 266 00:17:55,680 --> 00:17:58,600 Speaker 1: is believing that there is one truth and you're the 267 00:17:58,600 --> 00:18:02,080 Speaker 1: one with access to it while the others are trolls, 268 00:18:02,119 --> 00:18:06,080 Speaker 1: were misinformed. Most of us find it difficult to take 269 00:18:06,080 --> 00:18:09,879 Speaker 1: the perspective that there are billions of heads on this planet, 270 00:18:10,000 --> 00:18:14,560 Speaker 1: and they each have their own internal cosmos with their 271 00:18:14,640 --> 00:18:17,520 Speaker 1: sense of what is right and what is wrong. So 272 00:18:17,560 --> 00:18:22,439 Speaker 1: there are multiple perspectives on essentially everything. Now, that's not 273 00:18:22,600 --> 00:18:26,640 Speaker 1: equivalent to saying that everyone is factually correct when they're 274 00:18:26,640 --> 00:18:29,440 Speaker 1: commenting on something that happened. I am not making a 275 00:18:29,640 --> 00:18:34,160 Speaker 1: moral equivalence between different positions, some of which are closer 276 00:18:34,280 --> 00:18:38,120 Speaker 1: or more distant from the objective truth. Instead, what I'm 277 00:18:38,119 --> 00:18:42,520 Speaker 1: pointing to is the complexity of a world made of 278 00:18:42,640 --> 00:18:47,320 Speaker 1: lots of individual brains and the difficulty or often impossibility 279 00:18:47,760 --> 00:18:51,359 Speaker 1: of getting to the truth or knowing when you actually 280 00:18:51,480 --> 00:18:54,879 Speaker 1: have it. In other words, let's assume that the truth 281 00:18:54,960 --> 00:18:59,000 Speaker 1: exists independent of any individual, but it's not the case 282 00:18:59,040 --> 00:19:01,840 Speaker 1: that people can eat easily get to it. When I 283 00:19:01,920 --> 00:19:04,600 Speaker 1: say your truth and my truth. I don't mean that 284 00:19:04,880 --> 00:19:07,800 Speaker 1: this is actually the objective truth. I mean that all 285 00:19:07,840 --> 00:19:11,359 Speaker 1: we have are our perspectives, and this is for the 286 00:19:11,359 --> 00:19:14,560 Speaker 1: most part all we ever have access to. And I'll 287 00:19:14,600 --> 00:19:17,040 Speaker 1: give you lots of examples in this episode so you 288 00:19:17,080 --> 00:19:37,960 Speaker 1: can distinguish what I'm saying from mere cynicism. So take 289 00:19:38,040 --> 00:19:43,000 Speaker 1: any economic truth. Is inflation rising because of the president's 290 00:19:43,000 --> 00:19:47,040 Speaker 1: policies or the policies of the president before, or does 291 00:19:47,080 --> 00:19:48,760 Speaker 1: it have very little to do with that and more 292 00:19:48,800 --> 00:19:53,119 Speaker 1: to do with foreign policy or an inherent diminishment of 293 00:19:53,200 --> 00:19:56,960 Speaker 1: technical capacities, or because of bad luck with a number 294 00:19:56,960 --> 00:20:01,400 Speaker 1: of hurricanes or earthquakes, or because of chain technologies which 295 00:20:01,440 --> 00:20:05,120 Speaker 1: another country now has the lead on, or whatever. The answer, 296 00:20:05,160 --> 00:20:07,639 Speaker 1: of course is that it might involve all of these 297 00:20:08,000 --> 00:20:12,720 Speaker 1: and one hundred more factors, because the economy is a dynamic, 298 00:20:12,920 --> 00:20:18,439 Speaker 1: emergent property of the behavior of hundreds of millions of humans. So, 299 00:20:18,840 --> 00:20:22,880 Speaker 1: if you are interested in publishing only the truth on 300 00:20:22,920 --> 00:20:28,240 Speaker 1: your social media site, which story do you publish? And 301 00:20:28,280 --> 00:20:32,200 Speaker 1: the related problem is whose truth do you publish? Based 302 00:20:32,240 --> 00:20:35,439 Speaker 1: on different points of view, there may be many different 303 00:20:35,480 --> 00:20:39,320 Speaker 1: perspectives on the same event. Any real world event is 304 00:20:39,440 --> 00:20:44,040 Speaker 1: complex with thousands of different viewpoints. Take something like a 305 00:20:44,480 --> 00:20:47,920 Speaker 1: battle that happens between two countries. What's the right way 306 00:20:48,280 --> 00:20:51,399 Speaker 1: to tell that story? From the point of view of 307 00:20:51,440 --> 00:20:55,240 Speaker 1: a young breadmaker who sees the effects of the invading army, 308 00:20:55,680 --> 00:21:00,040 Speaker 1: or the elder statesman who has many complex relationships that 309 00:20:59,880 --> 00:21:02,719 Speaker 1: can strain his next moves if he wants to be 310 00:21:02,800 --> 00:21:06,080 Speaker 1: remembered to history or re elected. Or the point of 311 00:21:06,160 --> 00:21:08,520 Speaker 1: view of a soldier on the ground who has no 312 00:21:08,600 --> 00:21:12,080 Speaker 1: idea why bombs are suddenly falling when this wasn't part 313 00:21:12,080 --> 00:21:14,800 Speaker 1: of the original mission plan that he was told about. 314 00:21:15,040 --> 00:21:19,200 Speaker 1: Or the seamstress who is apolitical and only cares about 315 00:21:19,240 --> 00:21:21,960 Speaker 1: her children and can't believe the mess the world has 316 00:21:21,960 --> 00:21:25,320 Speaker 1: gotten into. There are a million ways to tell the story, 317 00:21:25,800 --> 00:21:30,120 Speaker 1: and anyone can choose whatever shoes they want. Just look 318 00:21:30,119 --> 00:21:34,160 Speaker 1: at the October seventh massacre of Israelis by Hamas. Some 319 00:21:34,200 --> 00:21:36,800 Speaker 1: people choose to tell the story from the point of 320 00:21:36,840 --> 00:21:39,080 Speaker 1: view of the Israelis, some choose to tell from the 321 00:21:39,080 --> 00:21:42,360 Speaker 1: point of view of Hamas, same event on the ground, 322 00:21:42,840 --> 00:21:48,680 Speaker 1: but diametrically opposed interpretations of the meaning. So what does 323 00:21:48,720 --> 00:21:52,280 Speaker 1: it mean to tell the truth? Whose truth? Every person 324 00:21:52,280 --> 00:21:55,800 Speaker 1: in the world has a different perspective on which facts 325 00:21:55,920 --> 00:21:59,080 Speaker 1: matter in the telling of a story, and that's why 326 00:21:59,160 --> 00:22:02,320 Speaker 1: I was a little scared about my colleagues's idea of 327 00:22:02,840 --> 00:22:07,440 Speaker 1: let's make sure the media tells the truth. But I'm 328 00:22:07,480 --> 00:22:12,040 Speaker 1: just getting started and I want to unpack this much further. Okay, 329 00:22:12,080 --> 00:22:15,360 Speaker 1: so next maybe you'll say, look, at least we can 330 00:22:15,400 --> 00:22:18,639 Speaker 1: tell scientific truths, and a lot of people when they 331 00:22:18,680 --> 00:22:20,800 Speaker 1: think about this issue of truth in the media, they'll 332 00:22:20,840 --> 00:22:24,720 Speaker 1: cite issues about COVID, for example, and misinformation around that. 333 00:22:25,920 --> 00:22:28,439 Speaker 1: So look, I'm a scientist and I would love to 334 00:22:28,480 --> 00:22:30,640 Speaker 1: pump up my own field, but the fact is that 335 00:22:30,760 --> 00:22:35,280 Speaker 1: science is not infallible. Now, let me be absolutely clear 336 00:22:35,280 --> 00:22:40,200 Speaker 1: about something important. The scientific method is the best toolkit 337 00:22:40,520 --> 00:22:44,760 Speaker 1: humanity has ever had. And what is special about science 338 00:22:44,920 --> 00:22:47,520 Speaker 1: is that it is willing to knock down its own walls. 339 00:22:48,000 --> 00:22:51,480 Speaker 1: And this feature is a necessary part of how modern 340 00:22:51,520 --> 00:22:55,679 Speaker 1: science progresses. So that means it can change, and that 341 00:22:55,800 --> 00:22:59,880 Speaker 1: is part of its greatest strength. That's not a weakness. However, 342 00:23:00,160 --> 00:23:03,240 Speaker 1: it does mean that the notion that we can make 343 00:23:03,280 --> 00:23:07,880 Speaker 1: sure to always have clear scientific truths is inherently misguided. 344 00:23:08,560 --> 00:23:11,920 Speaker 1: So just look at COVID nineteen A sudden pandemic took 345 00:23:11,960 --> 00:23:15,960 Speaker 1: over the globe, and literally thousands of laboratories were trying 346 00:23:16,000 --> 00:23:18,520 Speaker 1: to figure it out all at once. But the culprit 347 00:23:19,119 --> 00:23:22,080 Speaker 1: was sub microscopic. So how do you figure it out? 348 00:23:22,280 --> 00:23:25,000 Speaker 1: Well by doing lots and lots of experiments and trying 349 00:23:25,000 --> 00:23:28,040 Speaker 1: to get things straight. But you remember that in March 350 00:23:28,080 --> 00:23:31,159 Speaker 1: of twenty twenty, it wasn't the least bit clear what 351 00:23:31,359 --> 00:23:34,800 Speaker 1: was going on with it. Was it something left on doorknobs? 352 00:23:34,840 --> 00:23:38,800 Speaker 1: Did we need to wash our groceries? People were coming 353 00:23:38,800 --> 00:23:41,760 Speaker 1: home and getting undressed in their backyards and hosing the 354 00:23:41,840 --> 00:23:45,560 Speaker 1: kids off, and they were wiping down their cardboard Amazon 355 00:23:45,640 --> 00:23:49,720 Speaker 1: boxes with tons of disinfectants. And you remember that the 356 00:23:49,960 --> 00:23:53,159 Speaker 1: Center for Disease Control announced in March of twenty twenty 357 00:23:53,600 --> 00:23:56,680 Speaker 1: that masks would not do any good, and then they 358 00:23:56,920 --> 00:24:01,240 Speaker 1: soon changed their mind and said everyone should wear masks. Now, 359 00:24:01,359 --> 00:24:05,560 Speaker 1: was this deception at play? No, it was figuring out 360 00:24:05,720 --> 00:24:10,080 Speaker 1: new data and new recommendations on the fly. And for 361 00:24:10,160 --> 00:24:13,119 Speaker 1: any of you who followed the scientific literature for the 362 00:24:13,160 --> 00:24:16,359 Speaker 1: past several years, you know there were hundreds or maybe 363 00:24:16,400 --> 00:24:20,040 Speaker 1: thousands of new papers on COVID nineteen that came out 364 00:24:20,119 --> 00:24:23,879 Speaker 1: every month. And what that represented at every moment was 365 00:24:23,920 --> 00:24:29,520 Speaker 1: that the story was evolving, and sometimes and evolving understanding 366 00:24:29,880 --> 00:24:34,000 Speaker 1: involves a change in direction. So if you are a 367 00:24:34,119 --> 00:24:37,200 Speaker 1: newspaper or a social media company that is only going 368 00:24:37,240 --> 00:24:40,560 Speaker 1: to publish the truth, what does that look like in 369 00:24:40,560 --> 00:24:42,840 Speaker 1: March of twenty twenty? Do you publish that there's no 370 00:24:42,960 --> 00:24:46,360 Speaker 1: point in citizens wearing any masks and you suppress any 371 00:24:46,400 --> 00:24:50,000 Speaker 1: voices that say otherwise because that was the official word 372 00:24:50,040 --> 00:24:54,520 Speaker 1: of the Center for Disease Control. I'm not criticizing the 373 00:24:54,640 --> 00:24:59,080 Speaker 1: desire to have truth. I'm merely pointing out the naivete 374 00:24:59,119 --> 00:25:02,280 Speaker 1: of thinking that they're there is a single knowable version 375 00:25:02,400 --> 00:25:06,679 Speaker 1: of the truth that should be published, and maybe thinking 376 00:25:06,720 --> 00:25:10,199 Speaker 1: that science will always have access to that truth, and 377 00:25:10,200 --> 00:25:12,080 Speaker 1: that if you do the right things and consult the 378 00:25:12,160 --> 00:25:18,440 Speaker 1: right experts, you can guarantee untouchable guardrails. That's the kind 379 00:25:18,520 --> 00:25:21,880 Speaker 1: of thing that led to deep troubles for the Soviet 380 00:25:22,000 --> 00:25:26,840 Speaker 1: Union when they assigned their nationwide agricultural oversight to a 381 00:25:26,880 --> 00:25:31,000 Speaker 1: man named Trophime Laishenko. Lashenko was a biologist who felt 382 00:25:31,080 --> 00:25:35,840 Speaker 1: that he knew the truth about proper farming practices, and 383 00:25:35,920 --> 00:25:40,400 Speaker 1: so he dictated these to Russians across thirteen time zones 384 00:25:40,880 --> 00:25:45,960 Speaker 1: and an enormous variety of climates and soils. In Soviet style, 385 00:25:46,480 --> 00:25:50,560 Speaker 1: this truth of how agriculture should be done was implemented 386 00:25:50,600 --> 00:25:55,240 Speaker 1: with an iron fist, and the mass starvation that resulted 387 00:25:55,240 --> 00:25:59,320 Speaker 1: from Lashenkoism is generally considered one of the factors that 388 00:25:59,480 --> 00:26:04,480 Speaker 1: led to the downfall of the USSR. But Lyashenko believed it. 389 00:26:04,760 --> 00:26:08,800 Speaker 1: To him his agricultural recommendations were the truth, and if 390 00:26:08,840 --> 00:26:11,080 Speaker 1: he could just get the others to see his truth, 391 00:26:11,400 --> 00:26:14,359 Speaker 1: everything would be so simple, and he wouldn't have to 392 00:26:14,840 --> 00:26:18,560 Speaker 1: imprison or execute the biologists who couldn't see the truth 393 00:26:18,880 --> 00:26:23,120 Speaker 1: as clearly as he could. So all this means it's 394 00:26:23,160 --> 00:26:25,159 Speaker 1: not as though we can just turn to science and 395 00:26:25,200 --> 00:26:27,960 Speaker 1: say that will give us the truth. Science is the 396 00:26:28,000 --> 00:26:31,520 Speaker 1: best set of tools we have ever developed, but let's 397 00:26:31,560 --> 00:26:35,840 Speaker 1: not pretend it can always answer everything. And by the way, 398 00:26:35,920 --> 00:26:40,359 Speaker 1: science is really not about truth. Instead, it's about falsehoods. 399 00:26:40,680 --> 00:26:44,000 Speaker 1: All science ever seeks to do is clarify our thinking 400 00:26:44,440 --> 00:26:47,879 Speaker 1: by ruling out things that are incorrect. But that's not 401 00:26:47,960 --> 00:26:52,119 Speaker 1: equivalent to telling us what is a fundamental truth? And 402 00:26:52,240 --> 00:26:55,040 Speaker 1: just one more note here, Even where there is science, 403 00:26:55,560 --> 00:26:59,520 Speaker 1: each individual will interpret it based on his own internal model. 404 00:27:00,080 --> 00:27:02,600 Speaker 1: An economist's friend of mine pointed out that if you 405 00:27:02,720 --> 00:27:07,000 Speaker 1: say the majority of scientists think that the vaccines are effective, 406 00:27:07,440 --> 00:27:09,800 Speaker 1: people on the other side will take that as proof 407 00:27:10,040 --> 00:27:13,320 Speaker 1: that the scientists are in on something devious, because why 408 00:27:13,359 --> 00:27:17,680 Speaker 1: else would so many scientists be agreeing with something so preposterous. 409 00:27:18,880 --> 00:27:21,879 Speaker 1: So we're talking about some of the challenges of knowing 410 00:27:21,920 --> 00:27:24,280 Speaker 1: the truth, and now I'll turn to the issue of 411 00:27:24,400 --> 00:27:27,800 Speaker 1: why the truth is so hard to get straight for 412 00:27:27,880 --> 00:27:33,159 Speaker 1: any society. First, everyone says they're just seeking the truth, 413 00:27:33,240 --> 00:27:35,639 Speaker 1: but I'm a little skeptical, And I'll just give a 414 00:27:35,720 --> 00:27:39,919 Speaker 1: random example from the Israel Hamas conflict. There are a 415 00:27:39,920 --> 00:27:43,480 Speaker 1: lot of people who describe themselves as feminists who came 416 00:27:43,520 --> 00:27:47,600 Speaker 1: out very strongly pro Hamas immediately after the October seventh 417 00:27:47,640 --> 00:27:51,159 Speaker 1: attack in Israel, and so I mentioned online that I 418 00:27:51,240 --> 00:27:56,439 Speaker 1: was intrigued by the cognitive conflict and compartmentalization that is 419 00:27:56,520 --> 00:28:01,400 Speaker 1: required for a feminist. To watch, for example, the video 420 00:28:01,680 --> 00:28:04,640 Speaker 1: of the twenty two year old German Israeli Shawnee Luke, 421 00:28:05,040 --> 00:28:07,760 Speaker 1: who was a young peacenick at the music festival, and 422 00:28:07,800 --> 00:28:12,280 Speaker 1: there she is on video, stripped mostly naked and stepped 423 00:28:12,359 --> 00:28:16,800 Speaker 1: on and spat upon by Hamas gunmen screaming and pumping 424 00:28:16,800 --> 00:28:20,280 Speaker 1: their rifles in the air, and she was clearly unconscious 425 00:28:20,440 --> 00:28:23,080 Speaker 1: or dead. And as you probably know, there have been 426 00:28:23,119 --> 00:28:26,639 Speaker 1: many reports of rape and general mutilations, and this is 427 00:28:26,680 --> 00:28:31,480 Speaker 1: currently under investigation by a UN committee. Now, in the 428 00:28:31,560 --> 00:28:34,600 Speaker 1: fog of war, it's not always easy to know precisely 429 00:28:34,960 --> 00:28:38,280 Speaker 1: which reports to believe. But here was the video of 430 00:28:38,360 --> 00:28:42,120 Speaker 1: Shawnee Luke, and it was filmed and released by Hamas, 431 00:28:42,240 --> 00:28:44,800 Speaker 1: so no one could even accuse it of being propaganda. 432 00:28:45,480 --> 00:28:50,400 Speaker 1: And I found myself surprised that amid all this brutal activity, 433 00:28:50,640 --> 00:28:54,400 Speaker 1: which included the slaughter of twelve hundred civilians, that some 434 00:28:54,600 --> 00:28:58,480 Speaker 1: feminists were coming out cheering Hamas. So I mentioned this 435 00:28:58,600 --> 00:29:03,280 Speaker 1: irony online, hoping that people could come to analyze a 436 00:29:03,400 --> 00:29:08,000 Speaker 1: very complex geopolitical situation without giving up what they claimed 437 00:29:08,000 --> 00:29:11,480 Speaker 1: were their core beliefs. And immediately one woman wrote to 438 00:29:11,520 --> 00:29:15,520 Speaker 1: me to say that the accusations of Hamas's violence against 439 00:29:15,600 --> 00:29:20,800 Speaker 1: women quote had all been debunked. Now, this is a 440 00:29:21,000 --> 00:29:23,520 Speaker 1: chess move that's as old as the hills. You take 441 00:29:23,560 --> 00:29:26,760 Speaker 1: a horrific event that just happened, and you simply pretend 442 00:29:27,160 --> 00:29:32,360 Speaker 1: it didn't happen because it's not consistent with one's narrative. Now, 443 00:29:32,400 --> 00:29:34,960 Speaker 1: I'm not saying this to criticize the woman who wrote 444 00:29:35,000 --> 00:29:38,160 Speaker 1: to me, and we exchanged a few messages about this 445 00:29:38,200 --> 00:29:40,520 Speaker 1: issue and about the notion of truth, and when I 446 00:29:40,520 --> 00:29:44,320 Speaker 1: pointed out the details to her, including for example, the SHAWNE. 447 00:29:44,440 --> 00:29:47,640 Speaker 1: Luke video that we both had seen, she took back 448 00:29:47,680 --> 00:29:51,840 Speaker 1: the statement that the brutality against women had been debunked. 449 00:29:52,080 --> 00:29:55,280 Speaker 1: But strangely, she ended by telling me that her only 450 00:29:55,320 --> 00:29:59,080 Speaker 1: mission was to make sure that people tell the truth online, 451 00:30:00,000 --> 00:30:03,080 Speaker 1: and I believe her that she feels that is her mission, 452 00:30:03,080 --> 00:30:07,160 Speaker 1: but that didn't stop her from saying or believing whatever 453 00:30:07,280 --> 00:30:12,200 Speaker 1: she wanted to counter what she found inconsistent with her 454 00:30:12,320 --> 00:30:16,640 Speaker 1: internal model. So my cynical statement is that it's actually 455 00:30:16,720 --> 00:30:19,800 Speaker 1: quite rare that any of us actually search for the truth. 456 00:30:19,880 --> 00:30:25,760 Speaker 1: We generally search for consistency with our belief structure. So 457 00:30:25,800 --> 00:30:28,720 Speaker 1: we all talk about wanting truth in media, but we 458 00:30:28,800 --> 00:30:32,760 Speaker 1: are all happy to dismiss evidence if it's not aligned 459 00:30:32,760 --> 00:30:37,320 Speaker 1: with our preconceived notions, with what we want to be true. 460 00:30:37,360 --> 00:30:39,719 Speaker 1: We watched this in two thousand and one with the 461 00:30:39,760 --> 00:30:44,480 Speaker 1: massacre at the twin towers, conspiracy theories blossomed. We saw 462 00:30:44,520 --> 00:30:47,239 Speaker 1: this with the moon landing in nineteen sixty nine. If 463 00:30:47,280 --> 00:30:49,880 Speaker 1: you didn't want to believe it, there's always a story 464 00:30:49,920 --> 00:30:52,400 Speaker 1: you could cook up about how the government filmed this 465 00:30:52,480 --> 00:30:55,840 Speaker 1: in a Hollywood studio. Now that story is not consistent 466 00:30:55,880 --> 00:30:57,880 Speaker 1: with the facts on the ground, like that you can 467 00:30:57,960 --> 00:31:01,080 Speaker 1: see with telescopes the artifact that we left on the moon. 468 00:31:01,600 --> 00:31:03,520 Speaker 1: But the only point I want to make here is 469 00:31:03,560 --> 00:31:07,600 Speaker 1: that there is always room for people's internal models to 470 00:31:07,840 --> 00:31:12,040 Speaker 1: discount or dismiss what does not fit for them. It 471 00:31:12,080 --> 00:31:15,280 Speaker 1: goes without saying that we all want the most truth 472 00:31:15,400 --> 00:31:17,560 Speaker 1: that we can have on our media, but we have 473 00:31:17,640 --> 00:31:21,160 Speaker 1: to face this facet of human behavior. We each have 474 00:31:21,440 --> 00:31:25,840 Speaker 1: our own stories and narratives, and it's typically not easy 475 00:31:25,840 --> 00:31:30,360 Speaker 1: for us to incorporate new data that contradicts our internal models. 476 00:31:30,880 --> 00:31:33,160 Speaker 1: So while everyone is on board with the idea of 477 00:31:33,200 --> 00:31:35,480 Speaker 1: making sure that news stations are telling the truth as 478 00:31:35,520 --> 00:31:38,640 Speaker 1: best as they possibly can, we should just note that 479 00:31:38,640 --> 00:31:42,160 Speaker 1: people are not as receptive to stories that contradicts their 480 00:31:42,200 --> 00:31:45,480 Speaker 1: models as we might believe. Because you can always pull 481 00:31:45,960 --> 00:31:49,920 Speaker 1: the intellectual ripcord of saying, well that is fake news, 482 00:31:50,240 --> 00:31:52,840 Speaker 1: it doesn't fit my model, so it must have been 483 00:31:53,400 --> 00:31:58,040 Speaker 1: an AI generated video, or a larger government conspiracy at play, 484 00:31:58,440 --> 00:32:04,160 Speaker 1: or whatever we want. Now, beyond manipulating stories, we should 485 00:32:04,200 --> 00:32:07,920 Speaker 1: note that more commonly, we tend to simply ignore chunks 486 00:32:07,960 --> 00:32:11,280 Speaker 1: of stories. This is what psychologists refer to as a 487 00:32:11,560 --> 00:32:15,320 Speaker 1: confirmation bias, which is that we seek out information that 488 00:32:15,400 --> 00:32:19,920 Speaker 1: confirms our existing beliefs, and we ignore or dismiss information 489 00:32:20,240 --> 00:32:23,640 Speaker 1: that contradicts those beliefs. You can test this yourself by 490 00:32:23,720 --> 00:32:27,080 Speaker 1: raising the issue of book banning to people who are 491 00:32:27,080 --> 00:32:30,520 Speaker 1: on the left or the right side of the political spectrum, 492 00:32:30,880 --> 00:32:34,280 Speaker 1: and you'll extract the same immediate reaction out of both 493 00:32:34,280 --> 00:32:38,360 Speaker 1: of them. They'll say, yes, book banning is an anathema 494 00:32:38,480 --> 00:32:42,080 Speaker 1: to free speech, But ask them to consider the books 495 00:32:42,120 --> 00:32:45,440 Speaker 1: that their own side is trying to ban, and you'll 496 00:32:45,440 --> 00:32:48,960 Speaker 1: generally find a surprised look here, because it's easy to 497 00:32:49,040 --> 00:32:51,880 Speaker 1: see the bad on the other side. But the truth 498 00:32:52,000 --> 00:32:56,280 Speaker 1: is that both sides are putting equal effort into banning books. 499 00:32:56,680 --> 00:32:59,560 Speaker 1: For example, in this country, the right tries to ban 500 00:32:59,640 --> 00:33:03,680 Speaker 1: books like gender Queer or All Boys Aren't Blue? Or 501 00:33:03,680 --> 00:33:07,400 Speaker 1: the Hate You Give or books with sexually explicit passages 502 00:33:07,720 --> 00:33:10,320 Speaker 1: and on the left side, there are calls to ban 503 00:33:10,440 --> 00:33:14,400 Speaker 1: books like To Kill a Mockingbird and Huckleberry Finn and 504 00:33:14,480 --> 00:33:18,000 Speaker 1: books by Doctor Seuss. Groups on the left have burned 505 00:33:18,040 --> 00:33:22,280 Speaker 1: Harry Potter books because of outspoken opinions on trans issues 506 00:33:22,280 --> 00:33:26,000 Speaker 1: by the author. They've worked to persuade the publishers to 507 00:33:26,120 --> 00:33:31,719 Speaker 1: rewrite Raouel Dahl's children's books. Both sides love the idea 508 00:33:31,800 --> 00:33:34,720 Speaker 1: of giving a haircut to the library so that the 509 00:33:34,760 --> 00:33:37,600 Speaker 1: books that remain are the ones that are consistent with 510 00:33:38,000 --> 00:33:42,400 Speaker 1: their worldview, and according to penn America, there were at 511 00:33:42,480 --> 00:33:46,600 Speaker 1: least twenty five hundred book challenges from middle of twenty 512 00:33:46,640 --> 00:33:50,200 Speaker 1: twenty one to twenty twenty two that affected about seventeen 513 00:33:50,280 --> 00:33:53,600 Speaker 1: hundred book titles, and these challenges were from the right 514 00:33:53,720 --> 00:33:57,200 Speaker 1: and the left. But both sides are better at noticing 515 00:33:57,280 --> 00:34:00,680 Speaker 1: free speech violations from the other side, and their own 516 00:34:00,720 --> 00:34:05,360 Speaker 1: efforts to squelch books aren't seen as violations but simply 517 00:34:05,840 --> 00:34:09,560 Speaker 1: obvious things that anyone would want to do. And all 518 00:34:09,600 --> 00:34:13,319 Speaker 1: these problems we have with seeking truth has to do 519 00:34:13,480 --> 00:34:18,600 Speaker 1: fundamentally with the fact that our internal models are limited, 520 00:34:19,200 --> 00:34:21,200 Speaker 1: and you combine that with the fact that the world 521 00:34:21,280 --> 00:34:24,040 Speaker 1: outside of us is made of billions of brains doing 522 00:34:24,080 --> 00:34:27,600 Speaker 1: their own thing, and we see that real world situations 523 00:34:27,719 --> 00:34:32,040 Speaker 1: quickly grow to a complexity that our internal models just 524 00:34:32,120 --> 00:34:35,279 Speaker 1: can't handle. For example, I saw someone tweet the other 525 00:34:35,360 --> 00:34:38,399 Speaker 1: day that the situation in the Middle East is a 526 00:34:38,520 --> 00:34:43,279 Speaker 1: very complex geopolitical situation, and immediately she got hundreds of 527 00:34:43,320 --> 00:34:48,960 Speaker 1: replies saying it's not complex, it's very simple. And then 528 00:34:49,360 --> 00:34:53,560 Speaker 1: they tweet their clean brief story, their talking points on 529 00:34:53,600 --> 00:34:58,279 Speaker 1: whichever side they are, So you can find diametrically opposed 530 00:34:58,719 --> 00:35:03,719 Speaker 1: simple stories. What's interesting about societies is that people can 531 00:35:04,000 --> 00:35:07,600 Speaker 1: and do take any path they want through the yarn 532 00:35:07,640 --> 00:35:11,480 Speaker 1: ball of history to come to whatever conclusion they want 533 00:35:11,520 --> 00:35:17,760 Speaker 1: to Why. It's because although society is fueled by ideologies, 534 00:35:18,640 --> 00:35:24,600 Speaker 1: fundamentally ideologies aren't anything physical. They are beliefs held by 535 00:35:24,640 --> 00:35:28,759 Speaker 1: the only actual things on the ground, which is enormous 536 00:35:28,800 --> 00:35:32,600 Speaker 1: collections of human brains. So I'll give just one more 537 00:35:32,680 --> 00:35:35,680 Speaker 1: quick example about the difficulty of truth, and this is 538 00:35:35,680 --> 00:35:39,960 Speaker 1: something I've just been observing for a while. Imagine that 539 00:35:40,080 --> 00:35:43,560 Speaker 1: somebody makes a tweet about something and it seems innocent enough, 540 00:35:43,840 --> 00:35:47,160 Speaker 1: but then some comment er accuses the statement of being 541 00:35:47,560 --> 00:35:50,279 Speaker 1: a dog whistle. In case you don't know. A dog 542 00:35:50,320 --> 00:35:53,319 Speaker 1: whistle is this device used by dog owners that can 543 00:35:53,320 --> 00:35:55,560 Speaker 1: be heard by the dog, but is not heard by 544 00:35:55,640 --> 00:35:58,880 Speaker 1: humans because the frequency is too high. So the idea 545 00:35:59,000 --> 00:36:01,920 Speaker 1: of a dog whistle statement is that the person is 546 00:36:02,000 --> 00:36:06,759 Speaker 1: saying something that his followers and acolytes will understand, but 547 00:36:06,840 --> 00:36:09,680 Speaker 1: the rest of the community won't detect that it happened. 548 00:36:10,480 --> 00:36:14,279 Speaker 1: So surely there exists dog whistle tweets, But the difficult 549 00:36:14,440 --> 00:36:19,440 Speaker 1: challenge lies in the interpretation. So each time a public 550 00:36:19,480 --> 00:36:24,200 Speaker 1: statement gets made, some fraction of the population believes with 551 00:36:24,280 --> 00:36:28,000 Speaker 1: certainty that is a dog whistle, and despite the innocent 552 00:36:28,120 --> 00:36:32,799 Speaker 1: seeming statement, the person is really calling for jailing or 553 00:36:32,920 --> 00:36:39,000 Speaker 1: eradication or genocide or whatever. As predictably as gravity. Other 554 00:36:39,080 --> 00:36:42,160 Speaker 1: people are then motivated to point out that nothing of 555 00:36:42,200 --> 00:36:44,319 Speaker 1: the sort was ever said, and that the commenter is 556 00:36:44,360 --> 00:36:48,200 Speaker 1: being ridiculous to suggest so. But the first commenter is 557 00:36:48,320 --> 00:36:50,799 Speaker 1: certain that this is what was meant, it doesn't have 558 00:36:50,920 --> 00:36:54,640 Speaker 1: to be said because that person's followers know full well 559 00:36:54,680 --> 00:36:57,120 Speaker 1: what was meant. Now, this happens on all sides of 560 00:36:57,200 --> 00:37:00,520 Speaker 1: the political spectrum, even though as usual, the diferent sides 561 00:37:00,560 --> 00:37:03,000 Speaker 1: will say that this craziness only happens on the other side. 562 00:37:03,760 --> 00:37:06,719 Speaker 1: So what's going on here again? This has to do 563 00:37:06,800 --> 00:37:11,000 Speaker 1: with the differences in people's internal models, And you can 564 00:37:11,080 --> 00:37:14,200 Speaker 1: read through the comments and understand the internal models of 565 00:37:14,239 --> 00:37:16,960 Speaker 1: each person. The person who points out, my god, he 566 00:37:17,000 --> 00:37:20,480 Speaker 1: never even said that has a particular kind of model, 567 00:37:20,840 --> 00:37:22,839 Speaker 1: and the person who says, yes, but this is what 568 00:37:22,880 --> 00:37:25,560 Speaker 1: he actually meant has a very different kind of model. 569 00:37:25,920 --> 00:37:28,719 Speaker 1: And then the person who feels that the accusations are 570 00:37:28,719 --> 00:37:33,000 Speaker 1: an overreach can be accused of being deceptive or an apologist, 571 00:37:33,280 --> 00:37:35,799 Speaker 1: and the person who says it's a dog whistle can 572 00:37:35,840 --> 00:37:39,320 Speaker 1: be accused of simply trying to smear the original poster 573 00:37:39,840 --> 00:37:44,440 Speaker 1: with the lowest of accusations and moral pollution. So when 574 00:37:44,520 --> 00:37:48,680 Speaker 1: you watch a Twitter thread unfold, you are watching the 575 00:37:48,840 --> 00:37:56,160 Speaker 1: basic action reaction physics of different internal cosmosis coming into conflict. 576 00:37:57,239 --> 00:38:00,800 Speaker 1: And this leads us to the question about groups of people. 577 00:38:01,320 --> 00:38:05,000 Speaker 1: All the time, we're faced with questions about how do 578 00:38:05,160 --> 00:38:08,200 Speaker 1: Russians feel about this, how do Ukrainians feel? How about 579 00:38:08,239 --> 00:38:11,680 Speaker 1: East Coasters or West Coasters? How do liberals feel or 580 00:38:11,680 --> 00:38:16,560 Speaker 1: conservatives feel about some issue? Now, assessing the position of 581 00:38:16,800 --> 00:38:20,120 Speaker 1: some group of people is a totally reasonable question. To ask, 582 00:38:20,600 --> 00:38:24,360 Speaker 1: but essentially it is impossible to answer unless you're willing 583 00:38:24,400 --> 00:38:27,000 Speaker 1: to take on the fact that in any group there's 584 00:38:27,040 --> 00:38:31,759 Speaker 1: a massive spectrum of models. Now, maybe all you want 585 00:38:31,800 --> 00:38:35,040 Speaker 1: in some circumstances is just to know where the average 586 00:38:35,040 --> 00:38:38,279 Speaker 1: opinion is, or if the distribution is so narrow that 587 00:38:38,360 --> 00:38:40,560 Speaker 1: it can tell you what the group is actually going 588 00:38:40,600 --> 00:38:42,960 Speaker 1: to do on the ground. But if you really want 589 00:38:43,000 --> 00:38:46,920 Speaker 1: to understand the truth about something, it requires a different 590 00:38:47,200 --> 00:38:52,760 Speaker 1: level of detailed examination that typically does not get done. 591 00:38:53,080 --> 00:38:55,000 Speaker 1: Just take as an example the way that we always 592 00:38:55,080 --> 00:39:00,200 Speaker 1: look at economics. Politicians and pundits will typically take a 593 00:39:00,239 --> 00:39:03,239 Speaker 1: position about how people are going to behave this is 594 00:39:03,239 --> 00:39:06,839 Speaker 1: what people will do in this situation. But really, any 595 00:39:06,880 --> 00:39:11,000 Speaker 1: such model is doomed to be incorrect, either partially or mostly, 596 00:39:11,560 --> 00:39:16,320 Speaker 1: because populations of humans are very heterogeneous, they're very different 597 00:39:16,360 --> 00:39:20,640 Speaker 1: from one another. So take for illustration, the debate about 598 00:39:20,800 --> 00:39:25,640 Speaker 1: sending people a stimulus check. Some politicians say that if 599 00:39:25,640 --> 00:39:29,160 Speaker 1: you send people checks, people will use it to buy food, 600 00:39:29,560 --> 00:39:31,920 Speaker 1: and others will say no, people are going to use 601 00:39:31,960 --> 00:39:35,520 Speaker 1: it to buy drugs or alcohol because brains don't have 602 00:39:35,680 --> 00:39:39,560 Speaker 1: particularly good ability to resist temptation. And suddenly you've got 603 00:39:39,560 --> 00:39:42,320 Speaker 1: this free money sitting in front of you, and others 604 00:39:42,320 --> 00:39:44,840 Speaker 1: will say, okay, well, look, maybe they'll spend a little 605 00:39:44,840 --> 00:39:47,440 Speaker 1: of it on something stupid, but this gives them the 606 00:39:47,520 --> 00:39:51,520 Speaker 1: opportunity to invest the rest of it, which builds a cushion, 607 00:39:51,600 --> 00:39:53,960 Speaker 1: and it's very important for their lives, and so on 608 00:39:54,040 --> 00:39:58,040 Speaker 1: and so on. One can find countless opinions on what 609 00:39:58,160 --> 00:40:00,160 Speaker 1: a person will do when they find a check in 610 00:40:00,200 --> 00:40:04,360 Speaker 1: their mailbox, and whatever your opinion is will probably navigate 611 00:40:04,600 --> 00:40:07,879 Speaker 1: the way you vote on this point. But the fascinating 612 00:40:07,920 --> 00:40:10,560 Speaker 1: thing is that none of these points of view represent 613 00:40:11,080 --> 00:40:15,720 Speaker 1: the truth. The only meaningful approach to any economics problem 614 00:40:15,800 --> 00:40:20,040 Speaker 1: is to understand that there is a spectrum of attitudes 615 00:40:20,160 --> 00:40:23,480 Speaker 1: in the population, and then you make models based on that. 616 00:40:23,560 --> 00:40:27,640 Speaker 1: This is called agent based modeling. Because different people will 617 00:40:27,640 --> 00:40:31,359 Speaker 1: do very different things when they receive a stimulus check. 618 00:40:31,600 --> 00:40:34,320 Speaker 1: Some will buy food, some will buy drugs, some will invest. 619 00:40:34,920 --> 00:40:37,920 Speaker 1: And this is similar to the debates about the optimal 620 00:40:37,960 --> 00:40:42,040 Speaker 1: way to help with the homeless population. Is the heart 621 00:40:42,080 --> 00:40:45,600 Speaker 1: of the problem about mental illness or is it about laziness? 622 00:40:45,920 --> 00:40:48,640 Speaker 1: Or is it about hard workers with a difficult time 623 00:40:48,719 --> 00:40:52,600 Speaker 1: getting work. It's all of the above. It's heterogeneous, and 624 00:40:52,640 --> 00:40:57,240 Speaker 1: the reasonable approach is to understand that any one size 625 00:40:57,280 --> 00:41:01,080 Speaker 1: fits all solution is not going to solve the problem. 626 00:41:01,880 --> 00:41:05,600 Speaker 1: So when we ask for truth in the media, we 627 00:41:05,640 --> 00:41:09,000 Speaker 1: are always faced with this question whose truth? How can 628 00:41:09,040 --> 00:41:13,000 Speaker 1: we ever summarize a population of people as having any 629 00:41:13,080 --> 00:41:18,479 Speaker 1: particular truth, And this issue of the diversity within any 630 00:41:18,480 --> 00:41:22,720 Speaker 1: community is what makes the search for truth in media complicated. 631 00:41:23,920 --> 00:41:27,120 Speaker 1: In any community, let's say during wartime, you have the 632 00:41:27,239 --> 00:41:30,440 Speaker 1: doves and the hawks, you have the mothers and the fathers, 633 00:41:30,520 --> 00:41:33,120 Speaker 1: and you have the young men with nothing to lose, 634 00:41:33,200 --> 00:41:36,520 Speaker 1: You have the saints, and you also have the psychopaths. 635 00:41:37,040 --> 00:41:38,919 Speaker 1: And this is a theme I've talked about a lot 636 00:41:38,920 --> 00:41:42,600 Speaker 1: on this podcast, is just how different people are on 637 00:41:42,640 --> 00:41:46,960 Speaker 1: the inside. Now, the issue when things start heating up 638 00:41:47,000 --> 00:41:49,640 Speaker 1: between two groups of people, let's say the Palestinians and 639 00:41:49,640 --> 00:41:53,920 Speaker 1: the Israelis, is that each side chooses to show the 640 00:41:54,120 --> 00:41:59,160 Speaker 1: videos that maximumly agitate. So we see those who are 641 00:41:59,400 --> 00:42:04,520 Speaker 1: pro Is post videos of Palestinians doing horrific things, but 642 00:42:04,719 --> 00:42:08,879 Speaker 1: presumably that's not representative of all Palestinians, most of whom 643 00:42:08,920 --> 00:42:11,560 Speaker 1: are just looking to love their family members and make 644 00:42:11,600 --> 00:42:15,400 Speaker 1: their way in the world, and pro Palestinians post videos 645 00:42:15,440 --> 00:42:19,200 Speaker 1: of terrible things that Israelis do, like an Orthodox Jewish 646 00:42:19,239 --> 00:42:22,440 Speaker 1: settler saying awful things to a Palestinian woman, or an 647 00:42:22,520 --> 00:42:26,799 Speaker 1: Israeli soldier roughly handling a Palestinian youth who's just been 648 00:42:26,800 --> 00:42:31,239 Speaker 1: caught throwing rocks. But similarly, that doesn't represent the majority 649 00:42:31,320 --> 00:42:34,840 Speaker 1: of Israelis who are just looking to love their family 650 00:42:34,920 --> 00:42:38,319 Speaker 1: members and to make their way in the world. So 651 00:42:38,400 --> 00:42:41,920 Speaker 1: this comes back to the central question of truth in 652 00:42:42,000 --> 00:42:45,520 Speaker 1: the media. Is it untrue if I show a video 653 00:42:45,560 --> 00:42:49,680 Speaker 1: of someone on the opposing team doing something terrible, I mean, 654 00:42:49,760 --> 00:42:53,719 Speaker 1: it's not untrue, there's the video. Does that count as 655 00:42:53,840 --> 00:42:56,840 Speaker 1: truth in media? If you find the worst of the 656 00:42:56,880 --> 00:43:01,120 Speaker 1: other side and you magnify that, is that or truthy? 657 00:43:01,560 --> 00:43:04,279 Speaker 1: Or if you have the video but suppress it, is 658 00:43:04,360 --> 00:43:08,960 Speaker 1: that more truthy. What this illustrates is not simply the 659 00:43:09,080 --> 00:43:12,400 Speaker 1: complexity of truth in the media, but more broadly, the 660 00:43:12,520 --> 00:43:15,560 Speaker 1: naivete of feeling that you could put in a grant 661 00:43:16,160 --> 00:43:19,600 Speaker 1: and find the one truth and a good news station 662 00:43:19,800 --> 00:43:24,360 Speaker 1: can just present that. So let's now return to this 663 00:43:24,440 --> 00:43:26,960 Speaker 1: issue of truth in the media and ask the question 664 00:43:27,040 --> 00:43:30,800 Speaker 1: of whether there are any technologies that you could develop 665 00:43:31,200 --> 00:43:35,200 Speaker 1: that could do something to improve it. So one of 666 00:43:35,239 --> 00:43:39,680 Speaker 1: the ideas that people constantly reinvent is the following. They say, 667 00:43:40,000 --> 00:43:43,319 Speaker 1: could you just tell facts in the media, nothing but 668 00:43:43,360 --> 00:43:49,040 Speaker 1: the facts, no editorial overlay. Now that's a lovely aspirational idea, 669 00:43:49,080 --> 00:43:52,160 Speaker 1: but it may not be possible to achieve. Now that 670 00:43:52,239 --> 00:43:54,320 Speaker 1: might seem like a surprising statement, So I want to 671 00:43:54,320 --> 00:43:57,759 Speaker 1: give several examples to make this very clear. Okay, So 672 00:43:57,880 --> 00:44:00,880 Speaker 1: first you might challenge me and say, look, you can't 673 00:44:00,920 --> 00:44:03,439 Speaker 1: be saying that there's no such thing as a fact, right, 674 00:44:03,840 --> 00:44:07,480 Speaker 1: because there are many examples of facts. For example, if 675 00:44:07,480 --> 00:44:11,200 Speaker 1: you could independently verify from multiple sources, you could say 676 00:44:11,239 --> 00:44:14,880 Speaker 1: truthfully that a rocket was launched from this location at 677 00:44:14,880 --> 00:44:17,879 Speaker 1: this time and landed at this location at that time, 678 00:44:17,960 --> 00:44:21,279 Speaker 1: and that is simply factual. And I agree. But what's 679 00:44:21,440 --> 00:44:24,200 Speaker 1: interesting is that so little of what happens in the 680 00:44:24,200 --> 00:44:28,720 Speaker 1: world actually falls into that kind of simple category, because 681 00:44:28,960 --> 00:44:31,840 Speaker 1: there's often debate about what happened and what were the 682 00:44:31,880 --> 00:44:34,799 Speaker 1: triggering issues, and how far back to look for those 683 00:44:34,840 --> 00:44:39,000 Speaker 1: triggering issues. But even if you had all the facts, fundamentally, 684 00:44:39,040 --> 00:44:43,120 Speaker 1: there are always different ways to tell a story. So 685 00:44:43,480 --> 00:44:46,879 Speaker 1: from time immemorial, people have had concerns about the way 686 00:44:46,920 --> 00:44:51,520 Speaker 1: that journalists or historians might portray a war when they 687 00:44:51,520 --> 00:44:55,400 Speaker 1: wrote up a description, because the words they choose allow 688 00:44:55,480 --> 00:44:59,080 Speaker 1: them to spin sentiment. It's very difficult to tell a 689 00:44:59,160 --> 00:45:03,160 Speaker 1: story mutually. You have to choose which verbs you use 690 00:45:03,200 --> 00:45:06,120 Speaker 1: and which adverbs, and who's the actor and who's the subject. 691 00:45:06,160 --> 00:45:09,640 Speaker 1: And if you choose this different ways, you can get 692 00:45:09,800 --> 00:45:13,359 Speaker 1: very different emotional spins on the same story. Is this 693 00:45:14,000 --> 00:45:18,480 Speaker 1: aggressive dog bites man or is it dog defends itself 694 00:45:18,520 --> 00:45:23,600 Speaker 1: against aggressive drunk or is it heroic dog protects its owner. 695 00:45:23,960 --> 00:45:27,080 Speaker 1: You can have the same verifiable facts, but very different 696 00:45:27,080 --> 00:45:30,719 Speaker 1: ways of telling the tale. Now, this issue is far 697 00:45:30,760 --> 00:45:33,360 Speaker 1: from new, and if you're interested in a terrific book, 698 00:45:33,520 --> 00:45:37,319 Speaker 1: read The Great War and Modern Memory, which is about 699 00:45:37,480 --> 00:45:41,000 Speaker 1: journalism in World War One and this issue of how 700 00:45:41,040 --> 00:45:59,800 Speaker 1: a story gets told. So the question I want to 701 00:45:59,800 --> 00:46:03,360 Speaker 1: ask is are there any solutions to this issue that 702 00:46:03,440 --> 00:46:08,480 Speaker 1: a writer can spin a story. Well, when photography came 703 00:46:08,520 --> 00:46:11,319 Speaker 1: along and it became popular for the press to have 704 00:46:11,680 --> 00:46:15,880 Speaker 1: photographers on battlegrounds, this seemed to be a great solution 705 00:46:16,040 --> 00:46:19,600 Speaker 1: because if you capture a scene just by pressing the 706 00:46:19,640 --> 00:46:23,839 Speaker 1: shutter button, then that's the truth of the matter. There's 707 00:46:23,880 --> 00:46:29,040 Speaker 1: no editorializing. It's just the photons of what was there now. 708 00:46:29,080 --> 00:46:32,160 Speaker 1: Although we have photoshop now, they didn't have that back then, 709 00:46:32,239 --> 00:46:37,200 Speaker 1: and so an untouched negative really represented the truth of 710 00:46:37,320 --> 00:46:43,040 Speaker 1: what happened out there or did it. Pretty soon people 711 00:46:43,040 --> 00:46:48,760 Speaker 1: started realizing that even the war photographer makes choices which 712 00:46:48,800 --> 00:46:51,160 Speaker 1: things do I snap a picture of? And which things 713 00:46:51,200 --> 00:46:54,040 Speaker 1: do I not snap a picture of? And if I 714 00:46:54,080 --> 00:46:55,880 Speaker 1: am going to take a picture of something, how do 715 00:46:55,960 --> 00:46:58,800 Speaker 1: I set my position and the direction of my camera 716 00:46:59,160 --> 00:47:01,840 Speaker 1: so that I'm in I'm meaning certain things in the shot, 717 00:47:02,040 --> 00:47:06,279 Speaker 1: or making sure that certain things are outside the frame. So, 718 00:47:06,400 --> 00:47:09,840 Speaker 1: as it turns out, while war photography might be better 719 00:47:09,960 --> 00:47:14,440 Speaker 1: than just narrative, it doesn't achieve the vaunted title of truth. 720 00:47:14,880 --> 00:47:18,040 Speaker 1: A photographer still has to make choices about what to 721 00:47:18,160 --> 00:47:21,719 Speaker 1: give you and whoever it is, they have some agenda, 722 00:47:22,040 --> 00:47:27,320 Speaker 1: consciously or unconsciously, And there's another aspect to the neutrality 723 00:47:27,400 --> 00:47:32,160 Speaker 1: of cameras that's counterintuitive. There was a large outcry in 724 00:47:32,200 --> 00:47:35,279 Speaker 1: America after a man named Michael Brown was shot and 725 00:47:35,360 --> 00:47:39,000 Speaker 1: killed by police officers in Ferguson, Missouri, and this led 726 00:47:39,040 --> 00:47:43,640 Speaker 1: to legal debates that resulted in police officers all wearing 727 00:47:44,239 --> 00:47:48,000 Speaker 1: body worn cameras on their vests to document their interactions 728 00:47:48,040 --> 00:47:51,520 Speaker 1: with the public, because this way we can all see 729 00:47:51,560 --> 00:47:54,560 Speaker 1: the truth what actually happened. And that seems like a 730 00:47:54,560 --> 00:47:57,120 Speaker 1: pretty good idea. So it came as a bit of 731 00:47:57,200 --> 00:47:59,880 Speaker 1: a surprise that it has turned out to be so 732 00:48:00,000 --> 00:48:03,760 Speaker 1: so complicated in courts of law to determine the truth 733 00:48:03,800 --> 00:48:08,520 Speaker 1: of what happened. Why because what the camera sees is 734 00:48:08,560 --> 00:48:12,759 Speaker 1: not what the police officer perceives. For example, there was 735 00:48:12,800 --> 00:48:15,879 Speaker 1: an officer who ended up shooting an unarmed young man, 736 00:48:16,200 --> 00:48:19,279 Speaker 1: and he said the kid turned to him with a 737 00:48:19,320 --> 00:48:22,120 Speaker 1: look like a demon, and the officer felt certain that 738 00:48:22,200 --> 00:48:25,680 Speaker 1: his life was in danger as this kid charged him. 739 00:48:26,080 --> 00:48:30,240 Speaker 1: Now that's how it occurred for him. Now, for different 740 00:48:30,320 --> 00:48:33,880 Speaker 1: people who watched the footage from his vest camera, they 741 00:48:33,960 --> 00:48:36,319 Speaker 1: might see it in different ways. Some might interpret the 742 00:48:36,320 --> 00:48:39,160 Speaker 1: footage the way the police officer did, and others might 743 00:48:39,200 --> 00:48:43,239 Speaker 1: see an innocent young man who does not appear very aggressive. 744 00:48:43,560 --> 00:48:46,319 Speaker 1: And that's exactly what happened. For the jury who watched this, 745 00:48:46,719 --> 00:48:49,320 Speaker 1: some felt one way, some felt another. And this is 746 00:48:49,360 --> 00:48:52,640 Speaker 1: what happens all the time with jurys who watch footage 747 00:48:52,680 --> 00:48:55,879 Speaker 1: from police cameras. The point is that if you are 748 00:48:55,920 --> 00:48:58,880 Speaker 1: the officer and someone is charging at you and pulling 749 00:48:58,920 --> 00:49:02,800 Speaker 1: out something that you're interprets as a weapon, the camera 750 00:49:03,520 --> 00:49:06,319 Speaker 1: tells a story, but it's not your story, not what 751 00:49:06,360 --> 00:49:10,000 Speaker 1: it was like from inside your head, and your actions 752 00:49:10,040 --> 00:49:14,120 Speaker 1: are not determined by the objective footage. They are determined 753 00:49:14,120 --> 00:49:16,680 Speaker 1: by the script running in your head. Now, just to 754 00:49:16,719 --> 00:49:20,000 Speaker 1: be crystal clear, I'm not making a justification for a 755 00:49:20,040 --> 00:49:23,480 Speaker 1: police officer shooting an unarmed man. But I am saying 756 00:49:23,840 --> 00:49:27,920 Speaker 1: that we all live inside our own internal models and 757 00:49:28,000 --> 00:49:32,319 Speaker 1: a camera does not solve that. So I want to 758 00:49:32,320 --> 00:49:35,680 Speaker 1: come back to this endeavor of making true news. Could 759 00:49:35,680 --> 00:49:39,760 Speaker 1: we come up with some technology, something better than photography, 760 00:49:40,239 --> 00:49:44,759 Speaker 1: like a news source that just tells facts with no editorial. 761 00:49:45,520 --> 00:49:48,680 Speaker 1: So some thinkers hypothesized maybe there is a way to 762 00:49:48,760 --> 00:49:53,520 Speaker 1: do this with modern technology that doesn't involve any editorializing 763 00:49:53,560 --> 00:49:56,040 Speaker 1: of the facts. What you do is you make a 764 00:49:56,280 --> 00:50:00,000 Speaker 1: phone app and you have the citizens of that neighborhood 765 00:50:00,160 --> 00:50:04,040 Speaker 1: just post facts. People just enter an incident, but there's 766 00:50:04,040 --> 00:50:07,239 Speaker 1: nothing that follows. They post there is a fire on 767 00:50:07,320 --> 00:50:10,279 Speaker 1: this block, or there is a stray dog on the 768 00:50:10,320 --> 00:50:13,480 Speaker 1: loose at this corner. Or there's a car accident on 769 00:50:13,520 --> 00:50:16,960 Speaker 1: this street. You just enter the fact without any speculation 770 00:50:17,160 --> 00:50:19,880 Speaker 1: on how it occurred or advice on what to do next. 771 00:50:20,440 --> 00:50:24,840 Speaker 1: Maybe you could get citizens to arrive at something closer 772 00:50:24,880 --> 00:50:28,319 Speaker 1: to the truth this way. So this app exists. It's 773 00:50:28,360 --> 00:50:32,439 Speaker 1: called Citizen, And the idea with citizen is how can 774 00:50:32,440 --> 00:50:34,719 Speaker 1: we get to a place where we know the information 775 00:50:34,800 --> 00:50:37,680 Speaker 1: around us in a way that's not pushed through social 776 00:50:37,760 --> 00:50:41,000 Speaker 1: media and opinion filters. You can just say the facts 777 00:50:41,040 --> 00:50:44,040 Speaker 1: and you don't need to do anything to impose your 778 00:50:44,080 --> 00:50:49,520 Speaker 1: opinions or inspire action. So that seems like a great idea, 779 00:50:49,600 --> 00:50:52,840 Speaker 1: But what's most interesting is the failure of that idea. 780 00:50:54,000 --> 00:50:56,480 Speaker 1: So I watched when a friend of mine in Palo 781 00:50:56,520 --> 00:50:59,560 Speaker 1: Alto downloaded the Citizen app in twenty twenty, right when 782 00:50:59,600 --> 00:51:02,960 Speaker 1: there were riots breaking out in various cities, and he 783 00:51:03,000 --> 00:51:06,880 Speaker 1: got the information on Citizen that there were riots about 784 00:51:06,960 --> 00:51:10,840 Speaker 1: to break out in various locations in Palo Alto. According 785 00:51:10,840 --> 00:51:13,720 Speaker 1: to what he saw on the map, there were people 786 00:51:13,840 --> 00:51:16,799 Speaker 1: gathering and possibly they were armed, And so he went 787 00:51:16,840 --> 00:51:19,560 Speaker 1: out and bought a gun that evening to be able 788 00:51:19,600 --> 00:51:23,000 Speaker 1: to defend his family in case his house was raided 789 00:51:23,120 --> 00:51:26,120 Speaker 1: or torched or worse. Well, as it turns out, there 790 00:51:26,160 --> 00:51:29,040 Speaker 1: were zero riots in Palo Alto. But what you had 791 00:51:29,560 --> 00:51:33,040 Speaker 1: was a bunch of anxiety that spiraled. People felt they 792 00:51:33,040 --> 00:51:36,399 Speaker 1: were doing the right thing by noting on the app, Hey, 793 00:51:36,440 --> 00:51:40,239 Speaker 1: I saw five guys standing on this corner. Because those 794 00:51:40,280 --> 00:51:43,040 Speaker 1: guys looked like they were cooking something up. They looked worrisome, 795 00:51:43,400 --> 00:51:45,960 Speaker 1: and why were they just standing there not going somewhere. 796 00:51:46,200 --> 00:51:49,440 Speaker 1: And it's better to share information than not right. And 797 00:51:49,480 --> 00:51:52,799 Speaker 1: so the whole thing quickly spiraled out of control. And 798 00:51:52,840 --> 00:51:55,880 Speaker 1: this is typical of people on the ground reporting. I 799 00:51:55,920 --> 00:51:58,720 Speaker 1: know a woman who was at Northeastern University in twenty 800 00:51:58,760 --> 00:52:02,719 Speaker 1: twenty two and the director of the Immersive Media lab 801 00:52:02,960 --> 00:52:05,320 Speaker 1: called nine to one one because he had just opened 802 00:52:05,320 --> 00:52:09,440 Speaker 1: a package and it exploded and injured him, and the 803 00:52:09,520 --> 00:52:14,000 Speaker 1: case contained an anonymous violent note directed at the lab. 804 00:52:14,480 --> 00:52:18,160 Speaker 1: So law enforcement swooped in with two bomb squads and 805 00:52:18,320 --> 00:52:23,239 Speaker 1: a large portion of Northeastern's Boston campus was evacuated. Now 806 00:52:23,280 --> 00:52:26,719 Speaker 1: this incident was bizarre because the guy, it turns out, 807 00:52:26,920 --> 00:52:30,400 Speaker 1: had totally faked this and it was a setup to 808 00:52:30,440 --> 00:52:32,319 Speaker 1: make him look like he was the victim, and he 809 00:52:32,400 --> 00:52:35,800 Speaker 1: was doing this to get attention, but no one knew 810 00:52:36,120 --> 00:52:38,600 Speaker 1: that this was a fake thing at the moment. Instead, 811 00:52:38,680 --> 00:52:42,520 Speaker 1: everyone thought a real bomb had just exploded, and everyone 812 00:52:42,600 --> 00:52:47,320 Speaker 1: was justifiably panicked. And what happened was word rapidly spread 813 00:52:47,320 --> 00:52:50,280 Speaker 1: on the Citizen app that there were six other bombs 814 00:52:50,360 --> 00:52:53,160 Speaker 1: on campus, and soon enough everyone believed that there were 815 00:52:53,160 --> 00:52:56,319 Speaker 1: also two gunmen on campus, and of course nothing had 816 00:52:56,360 --> 00:53:00,200 Speaker 1: happened except for this one faked nine one one call. 817 00:53:00,800 --> 00:53:03,239 Speaker 1: So the idea of saying, ah, we can get to 818 00:53:03,239 --> 00:53:06,320 Speaker 1: the truth if people just put in what is happening 819 00:53:06,360 --> 00:53:10,279 Speaker 1: and don't add commentary, this is a defunct idea now, 820 00:53:10,760 --> 00:53:14,799 Speaker 1: because the problem comes from a diversity in the population, 821 00:53:14,920 --> 00:53:18,239 Speaker 1: not of political opinion in this case, but just anxiety. 822 00:53:18,600 --> 00:53:21,799 Speaker 1: An anxious person will see the five people standing on 823 00:53:21,840 --> 00:53:24,840 Speaker 1: the street corner and say, I think they're up to something, 824 00:53:25,120 --> 00:53:28,359 Speaker 1: and so their threshold for sharing what they see as 825 00:53:28,400 --> 00:53:32,439 Speaker 1: a possible threat is different than someone else's threshold. Someone 826 00:53:32,520 --> 00:53:35,400 Speaker 1: else might think, well, I want to see actual weapons 827 00:53:35,440 --> 00:53:38,440 Speaker 1: before I post this on Citizen, And there's no single 828 00:53:38,520 --> 00:53:42,320 Speaker 1: view that's correct here. It's just a difference in people's personalities. 829 00:53:42,920 --> 00:53:46,360 Speaker 1: So this is why the idea of a just the 830 00:53:46,480 --> 00:53:53,000 Speaker 1: facts app gives zero guarantee of surfacing the truth. So 831 00:53:53,120 --> 00:53:55,880 Speaker 1: this is why I was skeptical when my colleagues wanted 832 00:53:55,880 --> 00:53:59,319 Speaker 1: to write grants for how to restore truth in media, 833 00:53:59,440 --> 00:54:02,839 Speaker 1: first because the issue of restoring to a past time 834 00:54:02,880 --> 00:54:06,440 Speaker 1: when there was truth is illusory, but more importantly because 835 00:54:06,440 --> 00:54:11,960 Speaker 1: of the typically overlooked complexity of the endeavor. But they figured, 836 00:54:12,160 --> 00:54:14,279 Speaker 1: if we can just put some government money behind it, 837 00:54:14,480 --> 00:54:17,560 Speaker 1: we can get media to just say the right thing, 838 00:54:17,760 --> 00:54:23,760 Speaker 1: the truth now. F Scott Fitzgerald famously wrote the test 839 00:54:23,920 --> 00:54:27,560 Speaker 1: of a first rate intelligence is the ability to hold 840 00:54:27,760 --> 00:54:31,799 Speaker 1: two opposing ideas in mind at the same time and 841 00:54:31,920 --> 00:54:35,960 Speaker 1: still retain the ability to function. So what does a 842 00:54:36,000 --> 00:54:40,680 Speaker 1: more mature approach to truth seeking look like. Well, the 843 00:54:40,719 --> 00:54:43,799 Speaker 1: first thing involves a willingness to weigh the data and 844 00:54:43,960 --> 00:54:47,839 Speaker 1: change one's mind where appropriate. One of the deep tragedies 845 00:54:47,880 --> 00:54:50,360 Speaker 1: about what's happening in the Middle East right now is 846 00:54:50,360 --> 00:54:52,480 Speaker 1: that most people feel like the right thing to do 847 00:54:53,000 --> 00:54:56,400 Speaker 1: is take one side or another with clarity and certainty, 848 00:54:56,440 --> 00:54:59,360 Speaker 1: even though the situation is messy. And as I said before, 849 00:54:59,400 --> 00:55:01,680 Speaker 1: you can reach into the history and pull out many 850 00:55:01,719 --> 00:55:05,920 Speaker 1: different stories depending on the path you take. My intuition 851 00:55:06,160 --> 00:55:07,799 Speaker 1: is that a lot of people feel as though it's 852 00:55:07,840 --> 00:55:11,560 Speaker 1: important to take a side because otherwise you are wishy washy. 853 00:55:12,120 --> 00:55:16,759 Speaker 1: But I believe a passage into maturity requires us to 854 00:55:16,880 --> 00:55:20,120 Speaker 1: try to understand what is happening in the world and 855 00:55:20,160 --> 00:55:25,000 Speaker 1: to struggle with different points of view. Israelis and Palestinians 856 00:55:25,080 --> 00:55:28,400 Speaker 1: are two groups of people that are not distant genetically. 857 00:55:29,080 --> 00:55:33,320 Speaker 1: They both love their children, they love their families, They laugh, 858 00:55:33,480 --> 00:55:36,880 Speaker 1: they cry, They're both groups of human beings with all 859 00:55:36,920 --> 00:55:41,600 Speaker 1: the complexity that's entailed by that. That's the fundamental human level. 860 00:55:41,920 --> 00:55:44,200 Speaker 1: Now on top of that, you have this very deep 861 00:55:44,320 --> 00:55:47,960 Speaker 1: history of socio political complexity where people are born into 862 00:55:48,000 --> 00:55:50,960 Speaker 1: a situation. You either pop out of the womb and 863 00:55:51,000 --> 00:55:54,719 Speaker 1: find yourself a Palestinian or you find yourself in Israeli 864 00:55:54,920 --> 00:55:57,040 Speaker 1: and you try to figure out the world that way. 865 00:55:57,760 --> 00:56:02,000 Speaker 1: A mature view attempts to seek solutions when you have 866 00:56:02,120 --> 00:56:05,960 Speaker 1: the crashing momentum of millions of heads, each with their 867 00:56:06,040 --> 00:56:10,719 Speaker 1: own world model butting up against one another. I want 868 00:56:10,760 --> 00:56:13,280 Speaker 1: to emphasize that even though this episode might have sounded 869 00:56:13,320 --> 00:56:16,240 Speaker 1: a little bit cynical about the idea of finding the truth, 870 00:56:16,480 --> 00:56:20,720 Speaker 1: we can of course get ourselves closer a meaningful education, 871 00:56:20,920 --> 00:56:25,200 Speaker 1: we'll teach children or adults to not simply accept information 872 00:56:25,239 --> 00:56:28,800 Speaker 1: at face value. We always need to consider the source. 873 00:56:28,880 --> 00:56:31,560 Speaker 1: We need to evaluate the evidence as best we can. 874 00:56:31,920 --> 00:56:35,040 Speaker 1: We need to consider the context. But what I'm talking 875 00:56:35,040 --> 00:56:38,120 Speaker 1: about today goes even step further. I'm pointing to the 876 00:56:38,160 --> 00:56:44,080 Speaker 1: importance of having skepticism about our own models. The fact 877 00:56:44,160 --> 00:56:46,480 Speaker 1: is that humans have gotten everywhere they are because of 878 00:56:46,480 --> 00:56:50,600 Speaker 1: our capacity to do logic. But that's actually not the 879 00:56:50,680 --> 00:56:54,480 Speaker 1: typical way that we decide our political positions, even though 880 00:56:54,480 --> 00:56:58,520 Speaker 1: we believe it is. Instead, we are social creatures who 881 00:56:58,600 --> 00:57:02,279 Speaker 1: are driven by the narrativeatives of our in groups. And 882 00:57:02,440 --> 00:57:05,160 Speaker 1: even if we try to use logic for all our 883 00:57:05,200 --> 00:57:09,160 Speaker 1: political propositions, we're simply too limited by the complexity of 884 00:57:09,200 --> 00:57:11,840 Speaker 1: the world and the number of players on the ground 885 00:57:11,880 --> 00:57:17,600 Speaker 1: in any political situation. So objective truth exists, and seeking 886 00:57:17,640 --> 00:57:20,480 Speaker 1: it is what we should all be doing. But let's 887 00:57:20,520 --> 00:57:25,080 Speaker 1: not be naive in thinking that first we have privileged 888 00:57:25,200 --> 00:57:28,760 Speaker 1: access to it, and second that we can just do 889 00:57:28,840 --> 00:57:31,640 Speaker 1: something to surface the truth so that everyone can see 890 00:57:31,640 --> 00:57:34,960 Speaker 1: it as clearly as we can. The road to seeking 891 00:57:35,040 --> 00:57:39,200 Speaker 1: truth involves questioning our own internal models, digging into the 892 00:57:39,840 --> 00:57:44,400 Speaker 1: limitations of our beliefs, recognizing what we don't fully know 893 00:57:44,720 --> 00:57:47,840 Speaker 1: or don't fully understand. So at the center of this 894 00:57:48,080 --> 00:57:52,479 Speaker 1: is a call for intellectual humility. It only takes about 895 00:57:52,520 --> 00:57:55,560 Speaker 1: thirty seconds of surfing around social media to see that 896 00:57:55,600 --> 00:58:00,280 Speaker 1: people have many different perspectives about everything going on. One 897 00:58:00,360 --> 00:58:03,160 Speaker 1: possibility is that you see the truth and everyone else 898 00:58:03,240 --> 00:58:07,240 Speaker 1: is confused or obstreperous, or trolling or misinformed. But another 899 00:58:07,320 --> 00:58:11,520 Speaker 1: possibility is that you, too are sailing around within the 900 00:58:11,560 --> 00:58:16,560 Speaker 1: bounds of your own internal cosmos, believing that only you 901 00:58:16,600 --> 00:58:20,080 Speaker 1: see the real truth, and wanting to write government grants 902 00:58:20,160 --> 00:58:22,440 Speaker 1: so that everyone else can see it as clearly as 903 00:58:22,480 --> 00:58:25,760 Speaker 1: you can. So my advice to my colleagues who wanted 904 00:58:25,760 --> 00:58:30,080 Speaker 1: to write these grants, engage in dialogue with people you trust, 905 00:58:30,160 --> 00:58:34,040 Speaker 1: who you think are smart, and try to steal man 906 00:58:34,240 --> 00:58:36,240 Speaker 1: the other side. If you haven't heard that term, this 907 00:58:36,400 --> 00:58:40,120 Speaker 1: is the opposite of straw manning, which is a technique 908 00:58:40,160 --> 00:58:43,600 Speaker 1: for misrepresenting an opponent's argument to make it easier to attack. 909 00:58:44,080 --> 00:58:48,120 Speaker 1: Steel manning is a technique for strengthening an opponent's argument 910 00:58:48,440 --> 00:58:52,120 Speaker 1: so you can better understand it. To steal man inn argument, 911 00:58:52,480 --> 00:58:55,560 Speaker 1: you first need to understand the argument as well as 912 00:58:55,600 --> 00:58:59,480 Speaker 1: you can. You identify the premises and the conclusion, and 913 00:58:59,520 --> 00:59:03,040 Speaker 1: you work to understand the assumptions that underlie the argument. 914 00:59:03,360 --> 00:59:07,560 Speaker 1: You try to understand the argument from your opponent's perspective. 915 00:59:07,600 --> 00:59:09,640 Speaker 1: What are they trying to say? What are their goals. 916 00:59:10,080 --> 00:59:12,240 Speaker 1: I'm not saying you have to come to a conclusion 917 00:59:12,280 --> 00:59:14,880 Speaker 1: of agreeing with the other person, but this is an 918 00:59:14,920 --> 00:59:18,919 Speaker 1: extremely valuable technique to say, Okay, I'm going to put 919 00:59:18,920 --> 00:59:22,480 Speaker 1: myself in a totally different pair of shoes, or more exactly, 920 00:59:22,480 --> 00:59:24,880 Speaker 1: in a different brain with a different world model, and 921 00:59:24,920 --> 00:59:27,320 Speaker 1: I'm going to see how to try on these different 922 00:59:27,360 --> 00:59:32,320 Speaker 1: assumptions and different ways that I might believe that argument. Now, again, 923 00:59:32,360 --> 00:59:34,000 Speaker 1: this doesn't mean that in the end you need to 924 00:59:34,080 --> 00:59:36,240 Speaker 1: adopt the other person's point of view, but I believe 925 00:59:36,280 --> 00:59:40,040 Speaker 1: if you take on this intellectual habit, you will find 926 00:59:40,080 --> 00:59:43,920 Speaker 1: yourself a little more seasoned in your worldviews, which just 927 00:59:44,040 --> 00:59:46,880 Speaker 1: means that you will be slightly less able to say, 928 00:59:47,640 --> 00:59:51,160 Speaker 1: I think this complex situation is actually really simple, and 929 00:59:51,240 --> 00:59:54,280 Speaker 1: hence I'm willing to dehumanize this other group of humans 930 00:59:54,920 --> 00:59:59,320 Speaker 1: just based on some fundamentally arbitrary label like which deity 931 00:59:59,360 --> 01:00:01,720 Speaker 1: they happen to eve in, or how much melanin they 932 01:00:01,760 --> 01:00:04,160 Speaker 1: have in their skin, or which side of the tracks 933 01:00:04,200 --> 01:00:08,560 Speaker 1: they're from. So, in wrapping up, I find it unbelievably 934 01:00:08,600 --> 01:00:12,160 Speaker 1: fascinating that just during my lifetime, we've gone from a 935 01:00:12,200 --> 01:00:14,800 Speaker 1: world in which media meant one kind of thing, and 936 01:00:14,840 --> 01:00:17,640 Speaker 1: we got to see the invention of the Internet, which 937 01:00:17,640 --> 01:00:20,080 Speaker 1: took off just over a quarter century ago, to the 938 01:00:20,120 --> 01:00:23,000 Speaker 1: revolution in Ai, which took off just over a year ago. 939 01:00:23,640 --> 01:00:26,400 Speaker 1: And in each of those eras, the search for truth 940 01:00:26,520 --> 01:00:30,880 Speaker 1: maintains many similarities, but there are also some subtle changes. 941 01:00:31,480 --> 01:00:35,520 Speaker 1: So today's episode is about the challenges of knowing truth, 942 01:00:35,800 --> 01:00:38,480 Speaker 1: and in the next two episodes, I'm going to address 943 01:00:38,560 --> 01:00:42,120 Speaker 1: the technologies that we're surrounded with now and how those 944 01:00:42,400 --> 01:00:46,640 Speaker 1: influence the search for truth. So in next week's episode, 945 01:00:46,760 --> 01:00:50,080 Speaker 1: I'm going to address the Internet and social media. Is 946 01:00:50,120 --> 01:00:53,120 Speaker 1: there something about the Internet that's causing there to be 947 01:00:53,680 --> 01:00:56,800 Speaker 1: less truth? Could it be argued that the existence of 948 01:00:56,840 --> 01:01:00,360 Speaker 1: the internet causes more truth. We've changed the way we 949 01:01:00,360 --> 01:01:03,439 Speaker 1: get news such that everyone has a bullhorn? Now does 950 01:01:03,480 --> 01:01:06,320 Speaker 1: that change the way we do sense making? And I 951 01:01:06,360 --> 01:01:09,720 Speaker 1: think you'll find some surprises here because the big picture 952 01:01:10,160 --> 01:01:12,680 Speaker 1: is not what you might expect. So that's about truth 953 01:01:12,760 --> 01:01:15,880 Speaker 1: in the age of the Internet. Then, in the third 954 01:01:15,920 --> 01:01:20,360 Speaker 1: episode of this series, I'll tackle what artificial intelligence means 955 01:01:20,600 --> 01:01:23,720 Speaker 1: for the future of truth. What does AI mean for 956 01:01:23,800 --> 01:01:26,760 Speaker 1: what you see on a video, what you hear in 957 01:01:26,800 --> 01:01:30,760 Speaker 1: somebody's voice, or what you read online. We'll address lots 958 01:01:30,760 --> 01:01:33,040 Speaker 1: of things here, like the fact that AI has already 959 01:01:33,080 --> 01:01:36,680 Speaker 1: opened the door to deep fakes. We'll ask whether AI 960 01:01:36,840 --> 01:01:40,440 Speaker 1: needs to be sentient to be scary, and whether AI 961 01:01:40,560 --> 01:01:45,880 Speaker 1: gives a way to undermine our species traditional methods of 962 01:01:45,920 --> 01:01:49,280 Speaker 1: sense making. I'll just end this episode with a quotation 963 01:01:49,440 --> 01:01:54,360 Speaker 1: from Arthur Schopenhauer where he says truth is no harlot 964 01:01:54,400 --> 01:01:57,120 Speaker 1: who throws her arms around the neck of him who 965 01:01:57,120 --> 01:02:00,800 Speaker 1: does not desire her. On the contrary, she is so 966 01:02:01,160 --> 01:02:05,160 Speaker 1: coy a beauty that even the man who sacrifices everything 967 01:02:05,240 --> 01:02:08,960 Speaker 1: to her can still not be certain of her favors. 968 01:02:10,160 --> 01:02:17,760 Speaker 1: To be continued, go to Eagleman dot com slash podcast 969 01:02:17,800 --> 01:02:21,720 Speaker 1: for more information and to find further reading. Send me 970 01:02:21,760 --> 01:02:25,040 Speaker 1: an email at podcast at eagleman dot com with questions 971 01:02:25,120 --> 01:02:27,840 Speaker 1: or discussion, and I'll be making episodes in which I 972 01:02:27,840 --> 01:02:33,479 Speaker 1: address those Until next time. I'm David Eagleman, and this 973 01:02:33,760 --> 01:02:34,880 Speaker 1: is in our cosmos,