Difference between revisions of "Denialism"
(→About: rephrasing to make it clear that skeptics can fall for it too) |
(a better definition; further rewriting) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==About== | ==About== | ||
| − | [[category:isms]][[category:working definitions]][[category:rhetorical deceptions]][[Denialism]] is the repeated | + | [[category:isms]][[category:working definitions]][[category:rhetorical deceptions]][[Denialism]] is the repeated re-use of already-defeated but otherwise persuasive arguments -- an implicit ''denial'' that there are any valid counter-arguments. Denialism works when such arguments are presented to audiences which are either naive (unaware of the counter-arguments) or willing (being pre-disposed to agree -- "wanting to believe"). |
| + | |||
| + | Denialist arguments typically have a strong [[emotional argument|emotional]] component, enhancing their reproductive fitness through [[memic evangelism]]. | ||
This technique generally works best on those whose upbringing has been steeped in [[ideological protectionism]], which renders them unlikely to use [[rational]] inquiry to verify information they receive in certain contexts (e.g. at a function sanctioned by appropriate [[authority]], or by an authority-figure). | This technique generally works best on those whose upbringing has been steeped in [[ideological protectionism]], which renders them unlikely to use [[rational]] inquiry to verify information they receive in certain contexts (e.g. at a function sanctioned by appropriate [[authority]], or by an authority-figure). | ||
Revision as of 11:22, 16 March 2010
About
Denialism is the repeated re-use of already-defeated but otherwise persuasive arguments -- an implicit denial that there are any valid counter-arguments. Denialism works when such arguments are presented to audiences which are either naive (unaware of the counter-arguments) or willing (being pre-disposed to agree -- "wanting to believe").
Denialist arguments typically have a strong emotional component, enhancing their reproductive fitness through memic evangelism.
This technique generally works best on those whose upbringing has been steeped in ideological protectionism, which renders them unlikely to use rational inquiry to verify information they receive in certain contexts (e.g. at a function sanctioned by appropriate authority, or by an authority-figure).
Nonetheless, it is also possible for skeptical minds to be ensnared in denialism by the use of straw-man packing and possibly other similarly subtle techniques.
Examples
Links
Reference
- Wikipedia
- RationalWiki
LessWrong Wikimay have a differently-named but equivalent term (2009-12-12)Conservapediadenies the existence of denialism (2009-12-12)
dKosopediano information (2009-12-12)SourceWatchno equivalent page; try searching (2009-12-12)
News
News
- 2014/05/12 [L..T] Sandy Hook truther steals memorial sign, tells victim's mother her child never existed "A vinyl peace sign installed at a playground in Mystic, Connecticut, dedicated to a victim of the Sandy Hook shooting was stolen last week by a man claiming that the Newtown massacre never happened."
- 2014/05/01 [L..T] Why the Mormon Church Won't Say "Homosexuality" "In the LDS leadership, you will rarely hear someone say the words "gay" or "homosexual". Occasionally in older talks they will mention "homosexual" or "lesbian behavior". If you go to their site to research topics, this is what you will find when you search for "homosexual":" ("see Same-Sex Attraction")
- 2014/04/24 [L..T] In 2014, it's like deja vu all over again «Bill Kristol, the Republican National Committee, and conservatives everywhere instead dug into the internals to declare the poll is... skewed. It's as if 2012 has already escaped their memories.»