Respecting Truth

by Lee McIntyre

Throughout history, humans have always indulged in certain irrationalities and held some fairly wrong-headed beliefs. But in his newest book, philosopher Lee McIntyre shows how we've now reached a watershed moment for ignorance in the modern era, due to the volume of misinformation, the speed with which it can be digitally disseminated, and the savvy exploitation of our cognitive weaknesses by those who wish to advance their ideological agendas. In Respecting Willful Ignorance in the Internet Age , McIntyre issues a call to fight back against this slide into the witless abyss. In the tradition of Galileo, the author champions the importance of using tested scientific methods for arriving at true beliefs, and shows how our future survival is dependent on a more widespread, reasonable world.

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction, Politics, Sociology, Psychology, Science

162 pages, Paperback

First published May 15, 2015

About the author

I am a philosopher and my goal is to write books that engage our minds and connect with issues that we all care about. In my non-fiction, I am particularly interested in defending science against all forms of science denial and post-truth. In my fiction, I seek to raise moral questions that push us to the limit of what we would do to protect the people we love. It gets me excited when I reach an audience who may never have thought they would like philosophy, but it speaks to them. These days I still do some philosophical scholarship--and I teach ethics--but most days I can be found at my desk writing, with two big German Shepherds snoring at my feet.

Reviews

[Karen Jackson · Rating 5 out of 5]

The remedy to truthiness!”

I love books like this, on an important concept but written in accessible language. This book explains what’s behind science denial. From climate change to evolution to vaccines, the author lays the blame on willful ignorance, a timid media, and those academics who’ve decided that they don’t want to stand up for the idea of truth. It’s a fast read. And funny! There’s enough here that’s familiar from the denial discussion to make you appreciate a fresh take on how the whole thing comes down to disrespect for the concept of truth, but there’s a lot of new material too – on conspiracy theories, new research in behavioral economics, and political absurdities – to strike things forward. It also covers the Flying Spaghetti Monster, the Darwin awards, and other fun topics. This is the book to quote to your brother-in-law when he starts spouting off about how global warming is a hoax.

[Maurits · Rating 2 out of 5]

Although it's interesting, he sometimes makes strawmen out of his opponents, which is disappointing and frustrating.

[David Lees · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent book, published in 2015, but directly relevant to the current political debates. The author carefully backs his statements with examples and references. He distinguishes the different ways we can fail to find truth, which include imposition of ideology, self deception and confirmation biases. I am still reading so hopefully I can update these notes when I finish.

[Warren Wulff · Rating 3 out of 5]

A fair go at the important issues surrounding truth in the modern world. It only really touches on the media, and even less on social media, although I would argue both are central to current truth disrespect. This book focuses on scientific truth respect, and that’s fine, but I urge readers to take up McIntyre’s newer book The Scientific Attitude, which I think is a masterpiece and has these same ideas in a much more developed form.

[David Pratt · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great read

I found it very insightful and informative. I think everyone should take the time to read and absorb the ideas argued in this book.

[Liquidlasagna · Rating 1 out of 5]

Honestly, you can't respect truth if most of your weak arguments are basically creating Strawman Fallacies with the positions you disagree with.

Which is one of the oldest cheapshots in the book, in the James Randi school of Skepticism 101


For a guy at the Center for Philosophy and History of Science. he's got some pretty questionable views on science.... his strangest is that he basically looks forward to the day when economics and sociology (the soft sciences) eventually will mature and 'magically' be hard science.

That's basically an extreme minority viewpoint out there, almost to the point of ridiculous.

and well, it's always interesting when these guys push 'truth'
yet they'll take on controversial positions with a 55 gallon drum of moralizing
like all the recent stuff on race and climate

basically his clever innocent is that you basically need to respect truth
which is just commonly accepted opinions which are agreed upon by many

but the skeptics are loopy in that start shouting like Goebbels that you need to respect the truth of the mainstream media, and that you need to respct the truth of your government...

and in the best orwellian sense

Strange is basically it's the skeptic writing the book who determines what truth is, when the truth isn't so 'cut and dried'

He's pretty much the the closest the skeptic movement has to a philosopher these days, and when he's not going after low hanging fruit, he's making a fool of himself with half of his writings.

but you know how it is, if you agree with him, and don't have a problem with any of his postiions, he's as awesome as Apple Pie.

Just hide like a cockroach if he disagrees with you, he'll stomp on you...


Honestly, anyone who thinks the soft sciences just need a little more maturity and they will be a rock-solid hard science is basically one step away from the lunatic asylum.

........

Sadly the whole movement is incapable of knowing the different between a fact
and an opinion

Basically they have all the facts, so don't question a damn thing.
And if we pick the most irritating goofballs, naturally you'll go along with our position!

.........

"In the tradition of Galileo, the author champions the importance of using tested scientific methods for arriving at true beliefs, and shows how our future survival is dependent on a more widespread, reasonable world."

gag me with a spoon!

These guys are a part of the problem

All these so-called Skeptical Sallys are really nothing more than Authoritarians who have some cookie cutter set of strong opinions, basically extremely strong likes and dislikes, and well, their 'opinions' are FACT, and your 'opinions' are JUNK.

The strangest thing is all these skeptics are oddly non-skeptical in two things

a. They believe everything the mainstream media says
b. They believe everything the government says

That's not very skeptical now, is it?

........

"Lee McIntyre identifies the central problem of truth claims today--from global warming and GMOs to evolution and vaccinations--'willful ignorance.' Respecting Truth should be read by every member of Congress before voting on legislation, and they should do so based on the facts instead of party line. The problem is group think. The solution is having a 'designated skeptic'. I nominate Lee McIntyre."

Michael Shermer, Skeptic Magazine

[Jim Fitzgerald · Rating 4 out of 5]

We have a political candidate willfully ignorant as well as willfully dishonest leading a like-minded group of followers who are willfully ignorant though predominately honest. There search for truth as defined in this book through a metrics of reasoning simply does not exist. Should they grow in numbers sufficient to re-elect the candidate, the nation will revert to a time of a demon haunted world as expressed by Sagan years ago. This is an excellent book that is a harbinger of fate for this country. It should be read by every voter before November. But alas to think this can even remotely be possible saddens me. And so it goes.

[Arturo · Rating 4 out of 5]

Hace 10 años:
"The problem with all of this media mayhem is that it creates an environment in which liars prosper: where an American president can start a war over an outright lie which, even after it is exposed, is still believed by many. In a world in which one can do that, lying about global warming is comparatively easy.”