CommercialReal6268 t1_jb0kyci wrote on March 5, 2023 at 2:51 PM

From a pragmatic persepctive.

Our democracies hinge on the quality of the national debate/conversation. The quality is degraded to breaking point when people have alternative facts, there's no chance of resolving two arguements based on alternative facts.

Pre-'the internet' our facts were in a sense curated, because all media outlets (TV news / News papers) were responsible and liable for what they said. This meant that a fact was something that could be proven legally.

Obviously that wasn't a perfect situation, certainly not in a philosophical sense but it was a much higher bar than that set in online communities these days.

The legal and political instutions which set and applied liaible law were trusted. In Britain they've guided the national conversation for nearly 200 years in close to their current form. In which time living standards and freedoms have been protected and enhanced (compared to themselves in the 1820's).

I fear for next 200 years if the current alternative fact blizzard of whitlessness is allowed to continue unabated

Just an observation.

ElliElephant OP t1_jb0ohp8 wrote on March 5, 2023 at 3:19 PM

Surely it could only improve the quality of public discourse to collectively admit that having a debate doesn’t mean one side is right and the other wrong

CommercialReal6268 t1_jb0rma5 wrote on March 5, 2023 at 3:41 PM

Thats not an admition i'd be happy making across the board. Certainly not in the context of a public debate.

Some courses of action will result in a society that is more consistent with our values (what ever they may be), and some will result in a society that is less consistent with out values.

The values are not matters of fact but can be agreed. The effect of various policies can be matters of fact in the context of your society and assuming trustworthy institutions can curate the 'facts'.

Obviously none of this holds up to philosphical rigour but in pragmatic terms we need to defend the concept of a fact as an atom of truth to enable democratic debate.