It’s not that most people truly believe that news is fake or not.

It’s identity.

You can’t put all your eggs into a basket and have contradictory information presented to you. 

It’s an assult on your sense of identity. That’s uncomfortable for people. 

If you are demonstrably wrong, you have only two real options: acknowledge the information, accept it, and incorporate it into changes of belief and opinion. The other option, one we see all the time, is to become defensive and reject both the information and the need to adapt to it.

Information isn’t dangerous. Rejecting anyting that doesn’t conform to objective reality, however, creates a majojr problem for rationality and reason, both of which allegedly drive most of ur lives. This tendency to reject information has significantly warped our ability to live in society. Appeals to reason aren’t revered as they once were. 

It can be religion, politics, science, or behavior.

Even though I’m not explaing myself thoroughly, something simliar came up earlier in the week. Someone was incredulous about weather prediction, doubting the way it is done, etc. They lacked a significant grasp of basic science. Among those things were not understanding the proximity of Doppler radar or how the curvature of the earth affects rapid detection of dangerous storms. While I didn’t have to spell it out, I watched in real-time as the person struggled to find a way to admit they didn’t understand what they were complaining about. From that inablity came further assertions that aren’t sustainable.  There is no harm in admitting we don’t know. All of us are ignorant about different things. But all too often people double down. I respect people more if they say, “I don’t know” or “I don’t understand.” 

Science is the best example to use that creates the least anger. Its very nature is to suggest an explanation and then test it. Conclusions must change with new evidence. It’s how we have medicine, technology, and industry. All progress depends on it. 

If you ask science, “Is there a god?” it can say, “I don’t know.” The ability to say “I don’t know” is a hallmark of genius. It doesn’t say, “There is no god,” because negatives can’t be proven. It says, “Tell me more,” because information doesn’t threaten the scientific process. Uncertainty brings investigation and thought. Certainty brings rejection and stagnation. 

Any system of thought or ideology that precludes questioning is, by its nature, close-minded. Any answer that is supposedly obvious would mean that most people would agree. Observation proves that to be false. 

If you’re not a “tell me more” person, you’ve cut yourself off from knowledge and growth. Saying “tell me more” doesn’t weaken your theology or faith. It doesn’t have to dilute your politics. As I like to say, when we look at our past, we shake her head at some of the things we believed. It’s easy to admit you’re wrong with enough time. But somehow we all too often like to think we’re not wrong, even though our own lives prove we have been multiple times.

I think most of us prefer “tell me more” people. 

I know that the bean soup people might read this and completely miss my point. Or focus on one small aspect of what I’ve written. If you don’t know what bean soup people are, that’s a discussion for another day. 

X

.