The Problem With Trusting Unreliable Sources

Human beings construct their understanding of reality based on what they accept as true and correct, yet these concepts are remarkably fragile. We anchor our lives to our personal knowledge, assuming it reflects an objective world. However, if our perceptions are shaped by limited experiences and emotional conditioning, then what we call “reality” is often just a subjective mirage. In a sense, everyone is mistaking the projections of their own mind for absolute truth.

To avoid the dizzying chaos of an unknowable universe, a person constructs a highly curated, artificial narrative of how things work. This localized perspective might not be the best.

I have been contemplating this subject for a long time as a truth seeker, and I have realized that we need a more Trusted framework to navigate reality, one built upon an accepted truth. People nowadays are using Reddit and Google to seek truth, but Reddit is not absolute truth, and it is full of bad information, and outright propaganda. A lot of people on Reddit are wrong, yet they speak with confidence as though their opinions are established facts.

1 Like

Although ‘our perceptions’ can be shaped by those things ‘our perceptions’ do not have to be.

  1. It does not have to be this way.
  2. Even the perception that one has one’s own mind is ‘a perception’ shaped by limited experiences and emotional conditioning, but which is completely False and Wrong.
  3. People mistake, misinterpret, misunderstand, and just miss lots of things because of Past Experiences, but again it does not have to be this way.

It certainly is not. For example, many people have constructed a highly curated, artificial narrative that the Universe began. Some then constructed the highly curated artificial narrative that the Universe began by God or a big bang, although the actual Truth is very different.

There is no other way than through an agreed-upon and accepted truth.

The actual way ‘truth’ is obtained and gained is through agreement and acceptance. However, there is a way to distinguish between what is merely thought to be true and the Truth that is irrefutable. The irrefutable Truth aligns perfectly with Reality, and/or the objective world, Itself.

I think you will find that a lot of people have spoken as though their opinions are established facts quite some time before the introduction of the internet.

I think that metaphysicians (?) have been saying this for a very long time. There is no logic that will lead us to demonstrating or proving that apparent reality does or does not reflect Objective Reality. We need God’s Eye View for that. :wink:

1 Like

It smells like Kant in here. As does it ever. Kant pointed out that we can never know reality, but this is solved by collapsing the distinction between the apparent and the real, and instilling epistemic/intellectual virtues into those who would try to distinguish such reality.

The problem is a matter of ability. No new frameworks, other than educational, need be applied, says I.

Gaining and obtaining this View is far easier, simpler, and quicker than most people imagine.

Interesting. Please continue…? :slightly_smiling_face:

I think that there is value in anecdotal personal experience, it’s all we truly have that we can know directly. However, the key is keeping in mind that it is anecdotal and has to be used in combination with other forms of data on a subject.

I also think that the issue with people gathering information from poor sources is in a lot of ways due to the internet age where so much information is not only thrust upon you but is also sensationalized to get clicks or engagement. However, I still believe that if more people were taught critical thinking, they would do better at wading through the good and bad information.

1 Like

Yes, they only need to ask me. I am generous in explaining the Actual and Real Truth.

1 Like

While I agree with your analysis, my answer to the problem is different. I think we need to keep ourselves porous, uncertain, and throw ourselves into the argument.

God’s Eye view is obtained when one ‘looks from’ Everyone’s perspective, and this is where and when objective Reality is seen, understood, and known. From the subjective viewpoint of Everyone objectivity is found and seen. This is where what is True and Right, in Life, is also found and seen. The difference between what is true and right compared to what is True and Right is the former is from some people’s view and perspective, whereas the latter is from Everyone’s view and perspective. There is also the difference between thinking something and knowing something. Thinking something is true is not sure if it is true or not, whereas knowing something is true is knowing that Everyone could agree with it.

For example, some people think or believe that ‘we’, human beings, need money to live. These people think or believe this solely because of their own personally little limited past experiences. Whereas, ‘we’ know that human beings lived for thousands and thousands of years without money. Therefore, what Everyone could agree with is that ‘we’, human beings, do not need money to live. By putting “ourselves” ‘in ALL others’, and ‘seeing’ from that One unified perspective and view point, or what is also known as God’s Eye View, ‘we’ can find, ‘see’, understand, and KNOW the actual and irrefutable Truth of things.

And, from a morality or what is Right and Wrong, in Life, sense ‘we’ can also find, ‘see’, understand, and KNOW the Truth of things. ‘We’ all, individually, have a different view and perspective of what foods are okay and all right to eat, but only what is right by ALL is all right, morality-wise. For example, depending upon one’s own personal past experiences, individually ‘we’ might think that it is all right to eat pork, cows, donkey, goat, horse, dog, whale, cats, or even humans, while others will personally think that eating some or all of these animals is not acceptable and not all right. So, which animal/s is it all right to eat, exactly?

Human beings could argue or fight over this question for another few thousand years. However, and again, ‘seeing’ from Everyone’s perspective, which is done by ‘knowing’ what Everyone could agree with and accept, is done by ‘looking from’ Everyone’s perspective, also known as God’s perspective, as well as being known as ‘looking with and from’ the Mind’s Eye (which can and does ‘see’ ALL). When ‘we’ ‘look at’ the question, ‘Which animal/s are all right to eat, exactly?’ what ‘we’ can ‘see’ is there are many different human beings ‘trying to’ claim that ‘the animal/s’ that they eat are perfectly fine and all right to eat. However, and will ALL morality and truth seeking questions, ‘the irrefutable answer’ is in ‘the things’ that Everyone could agree with and accept. And, what Everyone can agree with and accept in ‘that question’ is human beings do NOT need to eat meat. Sure, if a human being, through childhood, has copied others in a community eating a particular kind of animal, then of course they would get accustomed to killing and eating those animals, and will very clearly come to ‘love’ the taste of that or those animal/s. But the ONLY think making the killing of and eating of these animals is just one’s own personal past experiences ONLY. And, unless one has had the perfect upbringing and past experiences, then what ‘we’ individually think or believe is true and right might not be AT ALL. What ‘we’ ALL can agree with and know is that human beings do not need to eat meat at all. Any “vegetarian” is living proof of this. (But, as most overweight, and trying to lose weight, meat eaters will say, "But look at how unhealthy they are? The hypocrisy and contradiction does not need pointing out). Anyway, it is an irrefutable fact that ‘we’, human beings, do not need to eat meat, just like I think ‘we’ do not need to eat vegetables either, also, but anyhow from Everyone’s perspective human beings can live without harming, hurting, killing, and eating animals. This is a Truth that no one could refute.
Now, to align this irrefutable Fact in moral terms ‘we’ need to work out if ‘we’ would want ‘this’ done to ‘us’ if ‘we’ were in ‘their position’. ALL existing living things want to exist and keep living. This can been ‘seen’ throughout ALL of Nature. So, if ‘we’ were a cat, dog, pig, cow, horse, whale, and any other human being, then ‘we’ can agree and accept that ‘we’ would want to stay and keep living. Therefore, from this Everything’s or God’s Eye point of view, which was obtained by ‘looking’ and ‘seeing’ from the Mind’s Eye (Truly Open) perspective, ‘we’ can ascertain what is Truly Right, and Wrong, in Life.

Through ‘empathy’ (by being able to “put ourselves in the shoes of others”, as it is sometimes refer as), which ‘we’ are able to do because of the Truly Open Mind, which allows ‘us’ human beings to be able to imagine absolutely any and everything, ‘we’ are able to ‘see’, ascertain, acknowledge, and share what is actually True, False, Right, and Wrong, in Life.

Now, some might still be thinking or believing that ‘we’, human beings, NEED to eat meat, or even NEED money, to live and survive.

Sure, ‘we’ NEEDED to eat meat to keep alive and survive but that was ‘before’, in the days when this is being written ‘we’ certainly do NOT need to keep, harm, kill, and eat animals. And, again, if ‘we’ did NEED TO, then which ones are the “Right animals” to keep/farm, kill, and eat, exactly? Do not forget humans are also animals, and ones with no more ‘right to life’ than any other animal.

As for money, ‘we’ human beings have lived for hundreds of thousands of years without money, and if ‘we’ are still here, in the days when this is being written, then ‘we’ obviously managed perfectly well WITHOUT any money at all.

To gain and obtain these sorts of Views, which as shown, is Truly very simple and easy to do, all ‘we’ have to do is just ‘look from’ a wider, bigger, and far more open ‘field of view’. It is through the Mind, which again there is One only, allows ‘us’ to “put ourselves in others”, and thus be able to ‘see’ from ‘their perspective/s’. The more others ‘we’ “put ourselves within” the bigger field of view ‘we’ have, and thus the more ‘we’ can ‘look at’ and ‘see’ and understand.

When ‘we’ do this from Everything’s perspective, then ‘we’ can ‘see’ from God’s perspective, and from that advantage point. The Trusted Source.

‘Looking’ and ‘seeing’ from our own personal and individual perspective and advantage point, in other words, from our own personal past experiences only, will obviously be a very small, narrow, and limited perspective only. Therefore, a very unreliable source.

There is Truth in this. However, and unfortunately what adults do just about all of the time is ‘look from’ personal past experiences first, and sometimes only, which prevents and stops them from finding and ‘seeing’ the actual irrefutable Truth of things.

Instead, what I found in finding, seeing, understanding, and knowing the actual Truth of things is ‘look from’ the completely Truly Open perspective first, and then, and only then, ‘look from’ personal past experiences to verify if what is being ‘seen’ from the Truly Open perspective is actually True and Right.

It is this kind of speaking where words like “poor sources” or “unreliable sources” are WHERE people’s prejudices come to light and can be very clearly seen.

Truth and Falsehoods can be within and can be seen in ANY source of information. There are Truths and Falsehoods in EVERY theological text, EVERY forum, EVERY sub-forum, EVERY scientific book, EVERYWHERE. That is when one is ‘looking’ and ‘seeing’ from the Truly Open perspective. But when one ‘judges’ and presumes that ‘a source’ is unreliable, untrustworthy, or is a poor source BEFORE the information is ‘looked at’ and ‘seen’, then it is these types of prejudices that stop and prevent people from being able to find and ‘see’ the actual Truths in Life.

Again, ‘we’ have another prime example of one who thinks or believes that ‘they’ are a ‘critical thinker’ when others are not.

Just maybe, ‘we’ could ALL do more ‘critical thinking’ in Life?

Now, if you believe if more people were taught ‘critical thinking’, they would do better at wading through the so-called ‘good’ and ‘bad’ information, then, just maybe, ‘you’ might like to inform ‘us’ of what ‘critical thinking’ involves, exactly, and then maybe teach ‘us’ ‘critical thinking’.

Also, would like to present some examples of so-called ‘good’ and ‘bad’ information here, so that ‘we’ can learn more?

Great. Since ‘you’ claim to be ‘generous’ in explaining the Actual and Real Truth, then ‘you’ will have no issue at all in explaining some now for ‘us’, correct?

For example, how does one obtain and gain God’s Eye View of things, exactly?

And, what are some of these Views, which most people have Incorrect, exactly?

What is ‘the problem’ here, exactly?

Will you provide any examples of arguments that you think we need to keep “ourselves” porous, uncertain, and throw “ourselves” into?

Also, WHY, if and when ‘we’ find an answer that ‘we’ know to be irrefutable, would we want to stay ‘uncertain’?

Well yeah, it is the nature of our minds to be rooted in pattern recognition. So while you say, “unfortunately”, I’m wondering what alternative you imagine.

  1. ‘you’, human beings, do NOT have your minds.
  2. Pattern recognition is a very DIFFERENT thing from following old, bad habits. ‘Looking from’ past experiences, and making Assumption on Past Experiences, or what I call APE-thinking, is NOT pattern recognition.

I just explained the alternative in my last few posts here in this thread. But, quite simple, ‘look from’ a Truly Open perspective first, and essentially, always and only. However, because EVERY person has had past experiences, then they can use those past experiences to verify or falsify something, but, again, ONLY AFTER ‘it’ has been ‘looked at’ from the Truly Open perspective only.

I gave examples about four posts prior to this one.

Reliability is a big issue. Even encyclopedias with a good reputation can be biased. In the algorithmic age the risk of biased material is even higher - clicking a story on a social media platform means suggested viewings of a similar stripe.

Wikipedia is ok in that regard but the pages on politics are likely to suffer from distortion.

Wikipedia isn’t completely reliable either. They get things wrong, and the information can be heavily influenced by the biases of the people editing it. Since Wikipedia can be edited by anyone, I don’t think it should be treated as a truth.

Now it sounds like you are off on a crackpot religious spiel.

Your ‘alternative’ sounds like a matter of fantasy to me. So I’m going to back out of this conversation, which I ‘knew’ I shouldn’t get into in the first place. (I didn’t trust my pattern recognition as much as I wish I had in this instance.)

1 Like

I was referring to specific pages, like science, as compared to politics. You can’t tamper with the page on silicates, as much as you can those on political figure/party.

1 Like

Fair enough, when people do not seek out clarification and clarity and instead just make Assumptions based on nothing but their own Past Experiences only, then they do interpret and construe all sorts of things like you have here.

So, having ‘empathy’, being ‘open’, and ‘looking from’ others’ perspectives and points of view is ‘fantasy’, well, to “wonderer” anyway.

Again, here is another prime example of HOW and WHEN one preexisting assumptions, beliefs, and prejudices effects ‘the way’ they communicate and ‘look at’ things.

LOL This one’s so-called “pattern recognition” led it to “see” ‘empathy, openness, and seeing from others’ perspective" as a “fantasy and crackpot religious speil”.

Which, again, goes to show how people’s presumptions can lead the completely astray.