What do you think?
Rate this book
Truth: 13 Reasons To Question Everything You Are Told
_________________'Macdonald zeros in on the slipperiness of factuality, offering an array of case studies from the worlds of history, commerce and – of course – politics.' New York Times True or false? It’s rarely that simple.There is always more than one truth in every story. Eating meat is nutritious but it’s also damaging to the environment. The Internet disseminates knowledge but it also spreads hatred. As communicators, we select the truths that are most useful to our agenda.We can select truths constructively to inspire nations, encourage children, and drive progressive change. Or we can select truths that give a false impression of reality, misleading people without actually lying. Others can do the same, motivating or deceiving us with the truth. In Truth, communications strategy expert Hector Macdonald explores how truth is used and abused in politics, business, the media and everyday life. Combining great storytelling with practical takeaways and a litany of fascinating, funny and insightful case studies, Truth is a chilling and engaging read about how profoundly our mindsets and actions are influenced by the truths that those around us choose to tell.For fans of Factfulness, A Field Guide to Lies and Statistics and The Art of Thinking Clearly, a fascinating dive into the many ways in which ‘competing truths’ shape our opinions, behaviours and beliefs.
319 pages, Kindle Edition
First published March 6, 2018
158 people are currently reading
1953 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 89 reviews
February 11, 2019
🐬 Complexity, History, Context, Numbers and Story are the (anti)heroes in here.
The Human Rights addressed very shallowly in here: the history of this 'Social Construct' has barely been scratched in here.
Q
In 1986, the Guardian newspaper ran a TV and cinema advert that has stuck in my mind like few others. In newsreel black and white, it showed a skinhead running away from an approaching car. The soundtrack was completely silent except for an authoritative voiceover: ‘An event seen from one point of view gives one impression.’ The same man is then shown from a different angle: he runs straight at a businessman, seemingly set on attacking him or stealing his briefcase. ‘Seen from another point of view it gives quite a different impression.’ Another cut, and we see the scene from above. A suspended load of construction material is juddering over the businessman’s head, out of control. The skinhead hauls the businessman aside, saving his life as the load crashes to the ground. ‘But it’s only when you get the whole picture you can fully understand what’s going on,’ concludes the voiceover. (c)
Q
When Amazon began ‘sanctioning’ Hachette authors, delaying shipping of their books and guiding shoppers away from their pages, more than 900 authors signed a protest letter. (с)
Q
Next time you hear someone start a sentence with, ‘Women prefer…’ or ‘Bankers are…’ or ‘Muslims want…’ or ‘The gay community feels…’, just think about the many diverse, complex and contradictory people being wrapped up in the impending declaration. Maybe it will be a truth of sorts, but we can be sure plenty of competing truths could be drawn from the same constituency. (C)
Q
Historical omission is widely practised in school textbooks, where the civil servants and politicians who decide national curricula choose to ignore the more embarrassing or shameful aspects of their country’s history. (c)
Q
Our history moulds our identity. It shapes the way we think. (c)
Q
The term ‘Dunkirk spirit’ has entered the English language to denote great courage, unity and determination in the face of adversity. (c)
Q
If Americans look back with shame on Saigon, and the British look back with pride on Dunkirk, the Chinese look back with deliberate and purposeful anger on their Century of Humiliation. ...
The long sequence of humiliations is blamed on the failure of imperial China to keep up with the technological development of the West. That failure, by implication, must never happen again. In this way are the Chinese motivated to build, to progress, to invent, to triumph. (c)
Q
Imagine you have been stripped down to your underwear and dropped in a lake. You have no idea where in the world you are, and when you exhaustedly crawl ashore there is no sign of human habitation or agriculture. You seem to be in the middle of nowhere.
Terrifying?
Not if you’re the astronaut hero of the movie Gravity, and against all the odds you’ve just made it back to Earth after being stranded in space, facing the imminent prospect of death by collision, incineration or asphyxiation. It is a testament to the narrative skill of the filmmakers that when Sandra Bullock pulls herself on to that alien shore and lies there clutching at wet sand, we rejoice in the conviction that all her troubles are over. She’s breathing fresh air! She’s on solid ground!
Yet exactly the same scene could have been the chilling start to a survival adventure. A lone woman with no food, map, shoes, matches, phone or knowledge of the wilderness has to find her way back to civilization. A daunting prospect. But because we know how much worse her situation was just a short while earlier, and we anticipate a NASA rescue mission, we see this scene as a happy ending.
Context makes all the difference to our impression of reality. (c)
Q
Context changes meaning.
Such context is part of the complexity of the world we are trying to understand. It is easy to say we should know the context of any actions and events we evaluate but harder to say which context is relevant or appropriate. Hearing a story in one context will give a very different impression to hearing the same story told within a different context. Deciding which contexts to highlight and which to downplay is a critical part of shaping reality. (c)
Q
A black and white cat named Humphrey used to live at 10 Downing Street in London. Humphrey shared the address at various times with three prime ministers, including Conservative Margaret Thatcher and Labour’s Tony Blair. In a telling experiment, British voters were shown a picture of Humphrey and asked to say whether they liked or disliked him. When described as ‘Thatcher’s cat’, Humphrey received a net approval rating of 44 per cent from Conservative voters and only 21 per cent from Labour voters; as ‘Blair’s cat’, Humphrey scored 27 per cent with Conservative voters and 37 per cent with Labour voters. Same cat, different context. (c)
Q
De Hory did not copy existing works of art. His method was to create something new that famous artists might have drawn or painted. He was always careful to use aged canvas, frames and paper, sometimes buying an old painting to reuse the canvas, or tearing blank pages out of antique books for sketches. His ability to imitate the style of Modernist masters was so good that few experts were able to tell the difference. A living artist, Kees van Dongen, was convinced that he himself had painted a work created by de Hory. One New York art gallery owner declared, ‘When it came to doing Matisse, de Hory was better than Matisse.’ Indeed, it is widely claimed that many of de Hory’s works are still on show in galleries around the world, misattributed to more famous artists.(c)
Q
Reframing–changing the context–is a vital skill in conflict resolution, innovation and change management. (c)
Q
Before we get to the numbers themselves, we need to check what they actually represent. Is a business boasting of its employment record talking about full-time employees, contractors, unpaid interns or ‘full-time equivalents’ (FTEs)? Is the demagogue quoting numbers of migrants, illegal migrants, economic migrants or refugees? Are all those people ‘on welfare’ unemployed or just eligible for child or low-income support? Do 7 out of 10 people really prefer Product Y, or is it 70 per cent of the people polled in a single town recently flooded with advertisements for Product Y? Are those government statistics referring to corn grown or corn sold, households or individuals, taxpayers or residents? Huge variation can be found in these distinctions, and therein lie opportunities for competing truths. (c)
Q
Canada and Australia have the highest rates of kidnapping in the world. Really, it’s true. Not because they are more dangerous than Mexico and Colombia but because their governments include parental disputes over child custody in kidnapping statistics. Similarly, Sweden is said to have the second highest incidence of rape in the world, with more than 60 cases reported per 100,000 inhabitants each year (the rate for India is 2 per 100,000). Yet this reflects not only Sweden’s better reporting of sexual crime but also a broader definition of rape. (с)
Q
There is a lovely graph on the Web that plots the decline in the number of pirates since 1820 against the rise in global average temperature. The correlation is uncanny: as the pirate population has decreased, the world has got warmer. Clearly, the fall in crime on the high seas has allowed more intercontinental trade, which has caused global warming!
That conclusion, of course, is ridiculous. As any fool can see, it’s the other way round: rising temperatures cause the alcohol in ships’ rum to evaporate, weakening the morale of pirates and driving them into more honest trades.
This spoof analysis warns us against assuming that an observed correlation between two number sets implies some kind of causal relationship. It has been noted that the more ice creams are sold in beach resorts the more people seem to drown. That does not mean that ice cream is causing fatal cramp; people tend to eat ice cream when it warms up, and people also tend to go swimming when the weather improves. There is no causation between ice cream consumption and increased cases of drowning; both are caused by a third factor. (c)
Q
Many a Victorian gentleman celebrated the chivalry of war, dreaming of mythical medieval knights doing battle according to a strict code of honour, even as the horrors of the Crimean War unfolded. Piero Manzoni managed to make his own excrement highly desirable in certain circles by labelling ninety cans of it ‘Artist’s Shit’ and declaring them works of art. Today, some have suggested that knowledge may become a bad thing if, for example, it gives us too much insight into our future diseases and death, or it reveals to us how much better off other people are elsewhere; both forms of knowledge are liable to make us unhappy. Some scientists suggest that excessive domestic cleanliness may be responsible for a rise in autoimmune and allergic diseases like asthma. If agriculture, hygiene and knowledge can be seen as undesirable, while war, faeces and failure can be seen as desirable, there does not seem to be any limit to the subjectivity of desire. (C)
Q
The word propaganda comes from the Office for the Propagation of the Faith (Congregatio de propaganda fide), set up by Pope Gregory XV in 1622 to oversee missionary work and combat the spread of Protestantism. Propaganda, for centuries, implied nothing more insidious than broadcasting the truth, at least as the Church saw it. Its Catholic origins put the word in bad odour in some Protestant countries, but it was only with the work of Joseph Goebbels, minister of propaganda in Nazi Germany, that propaganda became a noxious concept. The first definition in my dictionary reads, ‘information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote a political cause or point of view’. No one today would want the job of minister of propaganda. (с)
Q
People who identify as non-binary often prefer the pronoun they over he or she. ‘Singular they’ was the American Dialect Society’s word of the year in 2015. Some reject ‘labels’ or adopt such bespoke identifications that categorization becomes near impossible. This trend suggests the definitions traditionally used around gender and sexuality are frequently seen as unhelpful or even oppressive. (c)
The Human Rights addressed very shallowly in here: the history of this 'Social Construct' has barely been scratched in here.
Q
In 1986, the Guardian newspaper ran a TV and cinema advert that has stuck in my mind like few others. In newsreel black and white, it showed a skinhead running away from an approaching car. The soundtrack was completely silent except for an authoritative voiceover: ‘An event seen from one point of view gives one impression.’ The same man is then shown from a different angle: he runs straight at a businessman, seemingly set on attacking him or stealing his briefcase. ‘Seen from another point of view it gives quite a different impression.’ Another cut, and we see the scene from above. A suspended load of construction material is juddering over the businessman’s head, out of control. The skinhead hauls the businessman aside, saving his life as the load crashes to the ground. ‘But it’s only when you get the whole picture you can fully understand what’s going on,’ concludes the voiceover. (c)
Q
When Amazon began ‘sanctioning’ Hachette authors, delaying shipping of their books and guiding shoppers away from their pages, more than 900 authors signed a protest letter. (с)
Q
Next time you hear someone start a sentence with, ‘Women prefer…’ or ‘Bankers are…’ or ‘Muslims want…’ or ‘The gay community feels…’, just think about the many diverse, complex and contradictory people being wrapped up in the impending declaration. Maybe it will be a truth of sorts, but we can be sure plenty of competing truths could be drawn from the same constituency. (C)
Q
Historical omission is widely practised in school textbooks, where the civil servants and politicians who decide national curricula choose to ignore the more embarrassing or shameful aspects of their country’s history. (c)
Q
Our history moulds our identity. It shapes the way we think. (c)
Q
The term ‘Dunkirk spirit’ has entered the English language to denote great courage, unity and determination in the face of adversity. (c)
Q
If Americans look back with shame on Saigon, and the British look back with pride on Dunkirk, the Chinese look back with deliberate and purposeful anger on their Century of Humiliation. ...
The long sequence of humiliations is blamed on the failure of imperial China to keep up with the technological development of the West. That failure, by implication, must never happen again. In this way are the Chinese motivated to build, to progress, to invent, to triumph. (c)
Q
Imagine you have been stripped down to your underwear and dropped in a lake. You have no idea where in the world you are, and when you exhaustedly crawl ashore there is no sign of human habitation or agriculture. You seem to be in the middle of nowhere.
Terrifying?
Not if you’re the astronaut hero of the movie Gravity, and against all the odds you’ve just made it back to Earth after being stranded in space, facing the imminent prospect of death by collision, incineration or asphyxiation. It is a testament to the narrative skill of the filmmakers that when Sandra Bullock pulls herself on to that alien shore and lies there clutching at wet sand, we rejoice in the conviction that all her troubles are over. She’s breathing fresh air! She’s on solid ground!
Yet exactly the same scene could have been the chilling start to a survival adventure. A lone woman with no food, map, shoes, matches, phone or knowledge of the wilderness has to find her way back to civilization. A daunting prospect. But because we know how much worse her situation was just a short while earlier, and we anticipate a NASA rescue mission, we see this scene as a happy ending.
Context makes all the difference to our impression of reality. (c)
Q
Context changes meaning.
Such context is part of the complexity of the world we are trying to understand. It is easy to say we should know the context of any actions and events we evaluate but harder to say which context is relevant or appropriate. Hearing a story in one context will give a very different impression to hearing the same story told within a different context. Deciding which contexts to highlight and which to downplay is a critical part of shaping reality. (c)
Q
A black and white cat named Humphrey used to live at 10 Downing Street in London. Humphrey shared the address at various times with three prime ministers, including Conservative Margaret Thatcher and Labour’s Tony Blair. In a telling experiment, British voters were shown a picture of Humphrey and asked to say whether they liked or disliked him. When described as ‘Thatcher’s cat’, Humphrey received a net approval rating of 44 per cent from Conservative voters and only 21 per cent from Labour voters; as ‘Blair’s cat’, Humphrey scored 27 per cent with Conservative voters and 37 per cent with Labour voters. Same cat, different context. (c)
Q
De Hory did not copy existing works of art. His method was to create something new that famous artists might have drawn or painted. He was always careful to use aged canvas, frames and paper, sometimes buying an old painting to reuse the canvas, or tearing blank pages out of antique books for sketches. His ability to imitate the style of Modernist masters was so good that few experts were able to tell the difference. A living artist, Kees van Dongen, was convinced that he himself had painted a work created by de Hory. One New York art gallery owner declared, ‘When it came to doing Matisse, de Hory was better than Matisse.’ Indeed, it is widely claimed that many of de Hory’s works are still on show in galleries around the world, misattributed to more famous artists.(c)
Q
Reframing–changing the context–is a vital skill in conflict resolution, innovation and change management. (c)
Q
Before we get to the numbers themselves, we need to check what they actually represent. Is a business boasting of its employment record talking about full-time employees, contractors, unpaid interns or ‘full-time equivalents’ (FTEs)? Is the demagogue quoting numbers of migrants, illegal migrants, economic migrants or refugees? Are all those people ‘on welfare’ unemployed or just eligible for child or low-income support? Do 7 out of 10 people really prefer Product Y, or is it 70 per cent of the people polled in a single town recently flooded with advertisements for Product Y? Are those government statistics referring to corn grown or corn sold, households or individuals, taxpayers or residents? Huge variation can be found in these distinctions, and therein lie opportunities for competing truths. (c)
Q
Canada and Australia have the highest rates of kidnapping in the world. Really, it’s true. Not because they are more dangerous than Mexico and Colombia but because their governments include parental disputes over child custody in kidnapping statistics. Similarly, Sweden is said to have the second highest incidence of rape in the world, with more than 60 cases reported per 100,000 inhabitants each year (the rate for India is 2 per 100,000). Yet this reflects not only Sweden’s better reporting of sexual crime but also a broader definition of rape. (с)
Q
There is a lovely graph on the Web that plots the decline in the number of pirates since 1820 against the rise in global average temperature. The correlation is uncanny: as the pirate population has decreased, the world has got warmer. Clearly, the fall in crime on the high seas has allowed more intercontinental trade, which has caused global warming!
That conclusion, of course, is ridiculous. As any fool can see, it’s the other way round: rising temperatures cause the alcohol in ships’ rum to evaporate, weakening the morale of pirates and driving them into more honest trades.
This spoof analysis warns us against assuming that an observed correlation between two number sets implies some kind of causal relationship. It has been noted that the more ice creams are sold in beach resorts the more people seem to drown. That does not mean that ice cream is causing fatal cramp; people tend to eat ice cream when it warms up, and people also tend to go swimming when the weather improves. There is no causation between ice cream consumption and increased cases of drowning; both are caused by a third factor. (c)
Q
Many a Victorian gentleman celebrated the chivalry of war, dreaming of mythical medieval knights doing battle according to a strict code of honour, even as the horrors of the Crimean War unfolded. Piero Manzoni managed to make his own excrement highly desirable in certain circles by labelling ninety cans of it ‘Artist’s Shit’ and declaring them works of art. Today, some have suggested that knowledge may become a bad thing if, for example, it gives us too much insight into our future diseases and death, or it reveals to us how much better off other people are elsewhere; both forms of knowledge are liable to make us unhappy. Some scientists suggest that excessive domestic cleanliness may be responsible for a rise in autoimmune and allergic diseases like asthma. If agriculture, hygiene and knowledge can be seen as undesirable, while war, faeces and failure can be seen as desirable, there does not seem to be any limit to the subjectivity of desire. (C)
Q
The word propaganda comes from the Office for the Propagation of the Faith (Congregatio de propaganda fide), set up by Pope Gregory XV in 1622 to oversee missionary work and combat the spread of Protestantism. Propaganda, for centuries, implied nothing more insidious than broadcasting the truth, at least as the Church saw it. Its Catholic origins put the word in bad odour in some Protestant countries, but it was only with the work of Joseph Goebbels, minister of propaganda in Nazi Germany, that propaganda became a noxious concept. The first definition in my dictionary reads, ‘information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote a political cause or point of view’. No one today would want the job of minister of propaganda. (с)
Q
People who identify as non-binary often prefer the pronoun they over he or she. ‘Singular they’ was the American Dialect Society’s word of the year in 2015. Some reject ‘labels’ or adopt such bespoke identifications that categorization becomes near impossible. This trend suggests the definitions traditionally used around gender and sexuality are frequently seen as unhelpful or even oppressive. (c)
July 24, 2018
The author makes the case that for almost any issue, there is not just the one "TRUTH" but in fact, many competing truths. More so in the current digital age where we are often faced with a deluge of "information" from various sources (most of which are dubious), it is imperative that we be able to separate the wheat from the chaff in order to make informed decisions. Macdonald provides many good examples of how various issues can be argued from numerous angles and depending on the perspective you are coming from, all arguments can seem perfectly logical and convincing at the same time, even though they are diametrically opposed in effect and result. He covers various areas such as politics, economics and finance, corporate marketing, the environment, etc.
The key takeaway is not to listen to just one side of a story, more so if it is just a sound bite or a catchy headline, which people seem to be doing more of nowadays as a result of diminishing attention spans.
The key takeaway is not to listen to just one side of a story, more so if it is just a sound bite or a catchy headline, which people seem to be doing more of nowadays as a result of diminishing attention spans.
June 18, 2018
I am very excited about reading this book since we are in an epidemic of fake news and alternative facts, especially after the unexpected win by the PH government and also, other international issues that garners our interests such as Trump, Israel-Palestine conflict, China diplomacy and so much more.
I always want to know about Truth itself.
Well, truth is not as straightforward as some might think, or want to believe. Its not black and white, as there are different ways to speak about the Truth, and not all of them honest.
On most issues, there are multiple truths we can choose to communicate, and our choice of conveying the truth will influence those around us perceive an issue and react to it. Just see how various types of media write their headlines and see how people react to it in the comment section, and you'll know what I mean (just to name an example).
We can select truths that constructively engage people and inspire action, or we can opt for truths that deliberately mislead. Truth comes in many forms, and experiences communicators can exploit its variability to shape our impression of reality. For example eating meat is nutritious but it’s also damaging to the environment.
In this book, the author explores how truth is used and conveyed in politics, business, the media and everyday life, and how readers can spot and call out misleading truths. The author hopes that the book can help readers have a clearer understanding of the many faces of Truths and to better able navigating the world.
Great storytelling, combine with practical takeaways and insightful case studies that will definitely makes you nod in agreement (or maybe shake you head in disagreement, I don't know!)
I always want to know about Truth itself.
Well, truth is not as straightforward as some might think, or want to believe. Its not black and white, as there are different ways to speak about the Truth, and not all of them honest.
On most issues, there are multiple truths we can choose to communicate, and our choice of conveying the truth will influence those around us perceive an issue and react to it. Just see how various types of media write their headlines and see how people react to it in the comment section, and you'll know what I mean (just to name an example).
We can select truths that constructively engage people and inspire action, or we can opt for truths that deliberately mislead. Truth comes in many forms, and experiences communicators can exploit its variability to shape our impression of reality. For example eating meat is nutritious but it’s also damaging to the environment.
In this book, the author explores how truth is used and conveyed in politics, business, the media and everyday life, and how readers can spot and call out misleading truths. The author hopes that the book can help readers have a clearer understanding of the many faces of Truths and to better able navigating the world.
Great storytelling, combine with practical takeaways and insightful case studies that will definitely makes you nod in agreement (or maybe shake you head in disagreement, I don't know!)
July 12, 2018
Macdonald is a good writer and there is definitely food for thought here, but this had what I felt was a lot of irrelevant padding, and it seemed to be structured for a corporate audience (Macdonald is a corporate consultant). When he stuck to the topic at hand--how can we tell a truth from a lie, something not easy these days--it was good. But then he got too far into the squishy logic of looking at "competing truths" (sort of like "alternative facts") that he lost me.
December 11, 2018
In Truth: How the Many Sides to Every Story Shape Our Reality, Hector MacDonald has provided an incisive view of how language and belief interact to determine everything that people think, feel and do. His story is based on the psychological insight that everything that one understands comprises a worldview (or mindset), a collection of individual beliefs and meanings which automatically determine one’s thoughts, feelings, attitudes and actions on an ongoing basis. Everything that we think, feel and do is based on what we’ve learned to believe.
This starting point leads to the thesis that our mindsets are more or less useful to us (adaptive, in psychological terms) in various situations, and that each of us bears the responsibility for ascertaining that our beliefs, which ultimately determine what we do, are relatively beneficial for ourselves and others. According to the author, “We need to be more aware of how the truths we hear shape our mindsets and can entrench partisan divides.”
Truth contains a series of clearly written stories and examples, drawn from the author’s experience in a wide range of fields, which beautifully illustrate the pitfalls of human communication. It provides practical guidelines about dealing with the complexity and the difficulties inherent in the uses of language. Most of these tips urge readers to think carefully, to identify the various ways in which people manipulate meanings, and to be conscious of the tricks that nefarious communicators use to persuade people to do their bidding.
MacDonald acknowledges the limit of human understanding, which is well understood by the most highly qualified philosophers and scientists: the absolute and complete truth of any belief or opinion about anything which cannot be directly observed is actually unavailable to human beings. According to contemporary (postmodern) currents in philosophical and scientific thought, insisting that one knows the absolute truth about any complex issue is contraindicated. Our linguistic explanations and descriptions of things may be more or less reasonable; no opinion can be completely verified. As MacDonald warns, “[W]e should be wary of anyone who tries to assert the one ‘true’ truth and deny all others.”
Given this contemporary approach to rationality, it behooves consumers to think critically in order to distinguish the usefulness of the partial truths which compete for people’s belief. These partial and competing ideas are everywhere, and we should accept none of them without due consideration. Misleaders can use partial truths to convince people to think and act in particular ways, so careful thinking is needed to distinguish which truths (stories which seem to be more or less coherent) we should adopt and apply.
MacDonald discusses the notion of complexity, making the point that every social issue has many sides, and can be analyzed from various perspectives. Misleaders will pick and choose arguments which serve their purposes while disregarding pertinent evidence, ignoring relevant contexts, picking their favorite statistics, and making unjustified claims about general principles. Distinguishing these tricks enables one to refute one-sided perspectives, to recognize various alternative interpretations, and to select those ideas and actions which provide optimal benefits for people.
‘Morality’ refers to decisions and judgments about what’s better or worse for people, including decisions about what we should and shouldn’t do. MacDonald writes, “It is up to us…to define and agree our moral truths…The truths we choose to propagate will determine how those around us act…it is imperative we pick our moral truths carefully and communicate them well.”
In keeping with his theme that we can “use competing truths constructively to engage people and inspire action, but we should also watch out for communicators who use competing truths to mislead us,” MacDonald points out, “[P]oliticians, marketers, journalists, campaigners and even government bureaucrats can mislead us with the truth. It is up to us to catch them at it, call them out and resist dancing to their tune….It has never been more important for each of us to recognize a competing truth when we see it…We just need to choose our truths wisely and tell them well.”
This book clearly indicates the difficulties that we face in figuring out what to do when we’re confronted (and conflicted) by difficult and complex circumstances. What’s left for inquiring readers and educators at all levels to do is to apply in practice the distinctions that MacDonald has raised. While these abstract ideas are very interesting, and can be very useful, merely understanding how we are compelled by our mindsets to believe this and not that, and to enact certain habits and not others, seems unlikely to make much difference to a reader’s perspectives or habits. To change our beliefs and our habits on purpose we can commit ourselves to cognitive self-development, by engaging in educational discussions with people who understand different ideas and practice different habits than we do.
Deep thinking requires more than a bit of practice, and practical wisdom is a product of a lifelong commitment to considerations of coherency and morality. While most of our ideas and actions are quite automatic, actively considering which ideas to adopt and apply, as MacDonald recommends, isn’t automatic. This is an educational project, a matter of learning to analyze and explain complex sets of ideas by considering and developing various justifications (as philosophers and scientists have long practiced). These educational objectives are achieved by looking outside of one’s personal perspectives, learning from others with more experience, correcting one’s least coherent beliefs, and figuring out new alternatives.
I hope that Truth inspires its readers to realize that nobody should claim to know the absolute truth about the world or the people in it. Fallibilism is the idea that it’s much wiser to question one’s own beliefs than to insist that they’re true; all beliefs about the world should be considered as provisional rather than conclusive. That perspective has served for many as a useful starting point for developing practical wisdom, individual excellence and social flourishing.
This starting point leads to the thesis that our mindsets are more or less useful to us (adaptive, in psychological terms) in various situations, and that each of us bears the responsibility for ascertaining that our beliefs, which ultimately determine what we do, are relatively beneficial for ourselves and others. According to the author, “We need to be more aware of how the truths we hear shape our mindsets and can entrench partisan divides.”
Truth contains a series of clearly written stories and examples, drawn from the author’s experience in a wide range of fields, which beautifully illustrate the pitfalls of human communication. It provides practical guidelines about dealing with the complexity and the difficulties inherent in the uses of language. Most of these tips urge readers to think carefully, to identify the various ways in which people manipulate meanings, and to be conscious of the tricks that nefarious communicators use to persuade people to do their bidding.
MacDonald acknowledges the limit of human understanding, which is well understood by the most highly qualified philosophers and scientists: the absolute and complete truth of any belief or opinion about anything which cannot be directly observed is actually unavailable to human beings. According to contemporary (postmodern) currents in philosophical and scientific thought, insisting that one knows the absolute truth about any complex issue is contraindicated. Our linguistic explanations and descriptions of things may be more or less reasonable; no opinion can be completely verified. As MacDonald warns, “[W]e should be wary of anyone who tries to assert the one ‘true’ truth and deny all others.”
Given this contemporary approach to rationality, it behooves consumers to think critically in order to distinguish the usefulness of the partial truths which compete for people’s belief. These partial and competing ideas are everywhere, and we should accept none of them without due consideration. Misleaders can use partial truths to convince people to think and act in particular ways, so careful thinking is needed to distinguish which truths (stories which seem to be more or less coherent) we should adopt and apply.
MacDonald discusses the notion of complexity, making the point that every social issue has many sides, and can be analyzed from various perspectives. Misleaders will pick and choose arguments which serve their purposes while disregarding pertinent evidence, ignoring relevant contexts, picking their favorite statistics, and making unjustified claims about general principles. Distinguishing these tricks enables one to refute one-sided perspectives, to recognize various alternative interpretations, and to select those ideas and actions which provide optimal benefits for people.
‘Morality’ refers to decisions and judgments about what’s better or worse for people, including decisions about what we should and shouldn’t do. MacDonald writes, “It is up to us…to define and agree our moral truths…The truths we choose to propagate will determine how those around us act…it is imperative we pick our moral truths carefully and communicate them well.”
In keeping with his theme that we can “use competing truths constructively to engage people and inspire action, but we should also watch out for communicators who use competing truths to mislead us,” MacDonald points out, “[P]oliticians, marketers, journalists, campaigners and even government bureaucrats can mislead us with the truth. It is up to us to catch them at it, call them out and resist dancing to their tune….It has never been more important for each of us to recognize a competing truth when we see it…We just need to choose our truths wisely and tell them well.”
This book clearly indicates the difficulties that we face in figuring out what to do when we’re confronted (and conflicted) by difficult and complex circumstances. What’s left for inquiring readers and educators at all levels to do is to apply in practice the distinctions that MacDonald has raised. While these abstract ideas are very interesting, and can be very useful, merely understanding how we are compelled by our mindsets to believe this and not that, and to enact certain habits and not others, seems unlikely to make much difference to a reader’s perspectives or habits. To change our beliefs and our habits on purpose we can commit ourselves to cognitive self-development, by engaging in educational discussions with people who understand different ideas and practice different habits than we do.
Deep thinking requires more than a bit of practice, and practical wisdom is a product of a lifelong commitment to considerations of coherency and morality. While most of our ideas and actions are quite automatic, actively considering which ideas to adopt and apply, as MacDonald recommends, isn’t automatic. This is an educational project, a matter of learning to analyze and explain complex sets of ideas by considering and developing various justifications (as philosophers and scientists have long practiced). These educational objectives are achieved by looking outside of one’s personal perspectives, learning from others with more experience, correcting one’s least coherent beliefs, and figuring out new alternatives.
I hope that Truth inspires its readers to realize that nobody should claim to know the absolute truth about the world or the people in it. Fallibilism is the idea that it’s much wiser to question one’s own beliefs than to insist that they’re true; all beliefs about the world should be considered as provisional rather than conclusive. That perspective has served for many as a useful starting point for developing practical wisdom, individual excellence and social flourishing.
March 8, 2018
Is this a true review? 4 stars? Well yes and no. And Hector would agree with me. It is also a 1, 2, 3 and 5 star book -- sort of a pentagon of reviews are available, depending on the reader.
Subjective truth is a form of truth and perhaps the most dangerous when the believer acts on their truth. I'm not saying you should act on my review and I don't want to give the impression that this book is some sort of post-modern, relativistic, multi-cultural, everything is true so nothing is true, because it is not.
As I wrote that last sentence I realized the truth of this book: it is a lexicon of truth -- truth in its many faceted definitions which need to be taken into account whenever we talk about the "truth" of something, even this review.
Subjective truth is a form of truth and perhaps the most dangerous when the believer acts on their truth. I'm not saying you should act on my review and I don't want to give the impression that this book is some sort of post-modern, relativistic, multi-cultural, everything is true so nothing is true, because it is not.
As I wrote that last sentence I realized the truth of this book: it is a lexicon of truth -- truth in its many faceted definitions which need to be taken into account whenever we talk about the "truth" of something, even this review.
March 5, 2023
„Nu trebuie decât să ne alegem adevărurile cu înțelepciune și să le spunem bine”.
August 11, 2021
As I grow older, I leaned that the world is not simply black or white, yes or no, true or false. It is 50 shades of grey ( not the Mr. Gray in the so titled book, although his personality complexity makes it an expression that I find quite fitting). I find this book helpful as it articulated an important idea: There are many sides to every story. There are competing truths. The world we live in is complex and our perception is often shaped by our world view that can be biased based on our culture, upbringing or circumstances. The truth is there is no absolute truth. The author is a communicator so he looked at it from the perspectives of how to communicate the truth and guard ourselves from misinformers and misleaders. But I think the book has far greater importance in helping us to gain a better understanding of the social world we live in so we can be more aware and alert to the competing truths, accepting the limitations of our own point of views, and be more open, and vigilant against dogma. A must read for personal improvement.
The book is organised into four parts:
- Partial truths ( complexity; history; context; numbers; story)
- Subjective truths (morality; desirability; financial values)
- Artificial truths (definitions; social constructs; names)
- Unknown truths (predictions; beliefs)
The book is organised into four parts:
- Partial truths ( complexity; history; context; numbers; story)
- Subjective truths (morality; desirability; financial values)
- Artificial truths (definitions; social constructs; names)
- Unknown truths (predictions; beliefs)
August 1, 2018
The most important book you may ever read has arrived at a time when it is most sorely needed.
For both sides of a liberal/conservative debate understanding the motivations of others and the way in which we present and interpret truths, this is the most important book of 2018 and possibly the most important book a person could read in this or any year.
A fast, and concise read- with recaps at the end of reasonably broken up chapters, I am in awe of this book now and will be glad to share this book with anyone I know.
No matter your "leanings" politically, understanding what any one person, company or government is trying to spin, this book provides a great resource for looking at any item presented objectively.
You will be better armed against politicians and advertisements after reading this book.
I will share this with every person I know that has even a spark of independent thinking.
For both sides of a liberal/conservative debate understanding the motivations of others and the way in which we present and interpret truths, this is the most important book of 2018 and possibly the most important book a person could read in this or any year.
A fast, and concise read- with recaps at the end of reasonably broken up chapters, I am in awe of this book now and will be glad to share this book with anyone I know.
No matter your "leanings" politically, understanding what any one person, company or government is trying to spin, this book provides a great resource for looking at any item presented objectively.
You will be better armed against politicians and advertisements after reading this book.
I will share this with every person I know that has even a spark of independent thinking.
July 20, 2019
Idea is as simple as it can get, modern world is full of misleading information, on facebook or on the media. Most of the time there is no objective truth, because we people base our trust on social constructs that we create by believing in it. For example fiat currency or even bitcoin. Also many times there are cases where trust can be turn into lie just by omitting some details and so on and so on... pretty simple, but, reason why I'd recommend this one, is that it has great examples of lies around us, that some of us believe, for example reasons behind war on drugs, religeous cults and so on.
November 7, 2019
The world is full of competing truths, where many different things can be true at the same time. Truth can be used by those who seek to mislead, those who unintentionally misinform and those looking to inspire. It’s up to us to learn how to decipher how truth is used – by politicians, corporations and the media – so that when we form an opinion, it’s based on the full picture, not partial or selective information.
July 2, 2022
Who claims to know Truth? The politicians? Which politicians? The preachers? Which preachers? Marketers? Journalists? Bureaucrats? Who else? How do we know whom to trust? Who has the Truth? How can we know? This book was published in 2018. I wish it was more up to date, like in 2022, because the author could have had a lot to say about Trump's Big Lie (about how the 2020 election was "stolen") and the millions who believe it. It's quite a good book.
March 3, 2020
任何一组事实可以得出不止一个真相。
思维模式是指我们关于自己和周围世界的一组信念、思想和意见。我们的思维模式决定了我们对于事物的看法以及我们选择的行为。
实证性偏差：我们往往更容易接受与我们思维模式相符的真相，抗拒那些与我们内心观点相冲突的真相。
政治顾问：同新问题相比，选民对老问题的容忍度要大得多。如果无人驾驶汽车系统故障导致几百人在道路上死亡，即使交通事故的死亡总人数下降，这在政治上可能也是不可接受的。
我们从几个狭窄的渠道了解新闻和意见。我们往往会和想法一致的朋友或同事讨论问题。证实性偏差是普遍存在的。我们会下意识地滤除与我们的想法存在冲突的思想或数据。因此，我们很容易对非常重要的问题做出极具选择性的描绘。在许多问题上，我们只能听到很小的一部分竞争性真相。
“我们的看法涉及的空间、时间和事物超出了我们的直接观察范围。因此，我们不得不根据其他人的说法和我们的想象把它们拼接在一起。”
考虑沟通的道德维度。
本书的四个部分：
片面真相——背景是至关重要的。故事已经成为我们主要的沟通形式，但我们的故事必然会遗漏许多相关细节。
主观真相——态度与价值判断
人造真相——人为创造
未知真相——预测未来
生活是极为复杂的，你不可能看到整个画面。
我们别无选择，只能去简化和选择。
复杂性策略：
1、忽略——往往一两个关键真相会占据你的意识，是什么，这取决于你的选择。
2、混淆——面对令人不快的真相，将其淹没在其他大量的真相之中。但是从本质上说，其他的真相并不会缓和那个令人不快的真相。
3、关联——暗示关联。
对策：
考虑谈话的群体具有怎样的多样性、复杂性和矛盾性
判断标准：
只要我们选择强调的角度能够比较准确地呈现我们知道的事实（支持但不会歪曲所传达的现实的真相），那么简化和选择对于沟通者和听众都是一件好事。
引自 第1 章 复杂性
............................
物体并不仅仅是物体——它拥有背景，这影响了我们对它的看法。
原作的巨大价值不在于它的物理实体本身，而是在于它的背景——它的来源、故事、品牌、稀缺性、独特性。人们受到背景标签的影响。
通过强调某个背景，忽视其他背景，我们在听众开始思考相关问题之前有效地改变了他们的思维模式。
背景策略：
1、设置背景
框架错位使妥协不可能达成，有时，我们甚至很��听到与我们当前框架不符的信息。
这种框架也被称为“世界观”，很多人甚至没有意识到。
2、忽略相关背景
对策：
我们需要确保自己了解最贴切的背景。
引自 第3 章 背景
.....................
本章的主题是复杂性，但它的观点很简单：我们面对的大多数问题和实体过于复杂，无法得到完整描述；我们不得不表述片面真相，因为生活过于复杂，我们无法做出全面的表述。因此，倡导者和误导者可以通过选择支持个人意图的真相来影响现实。我们应该对政客、评论家和社会活动家保持警惕，因为他们一定会呈现出最适合自己的局部，而不是向我们展示整个画面。同时，我们也有机会从复杂的主题中选择简单的真相，从而更加有效地表达自己。只要我们选择强调的角度能够比较准确地呈现我们知道的事实，那么简化和选择对于沟通者和听众都是一件好事。
引自 第一章 复杂性
.........................
我们将会看到，各行各业有经验的沟通者会通过片面的事实、数字、背景、吸引力和道德呈现某种世界观，从而影响事实。
我们都在通过不同的视角看待世界，这些视角很大程度上是由我们听到和读到的不同真相塑造而成的。
20世纪伟大的政治新闻记者沃尔特.李普曼写道：我们的看法涉及的空间、时间和事物超出了我们的直接观察范围。因此我们不得不根据其他人的说法和我们的想象将它们拼接在一起。
英国广播公司播音员埃文.戴维斯指出：事实上，说谎常常是没有必要的，你可以在不使用谎言的情况下完成许多有效的欺骗。
引自 前言
...........................
数字是神奇的。它们可以提供语言常常无法提供的关于世界的清晰度。我们可以用数字来比较、评价事物，测量变化，总结出一个人物的一系列优秀品质。数字可以被任何文化中的任何人理解。它是一种世界语言。问题在于，我们许多人在很多时候对数字存在误解。即使是两个接受过统计学培训的科学家也看不出他们自己的数字说明了什么，难怪那么多人会数字的含义感到困惑。
数字策略：
1、选择有利单位
包装呈现的数字可能在暗示数字很大
2、使数字看上去变大或变小
百分率往往比数字本身提供更多信息（添加了总体的信息）
百分率也可能是我们忽略只占某事物很小比例的事物，尽管其绝对数字可能很大。
要想让数字变大，只需要把时间线拉长（算时间线上的总额）
3、隐藏或夸大趋势
将数字在有利的轴线上描绘
4、挑选统计量
辛普森悖论的关键是识别群体和子群体的差异
对策：
1、理解每个数字代表什么
2、选择最贴切的单位
3、把数字放到背景里
引自 第4 章 数字
...........................
故事是对变化过程的选择性连贯叙述，强调局面和事件之间的因果关系。
故事三要素：变化过程+因果关系+触发事件
故事的价值：使复杂的事物变得连贯清晰。
故事的问题：无法给出完整的画面，只是片面真相
（叙事谬误：我们在不编织解释或强行拼凑逻辑链条的情况下观察事实序列的能力存在局限。）
故事策略：
1、通过连接事实暗示因果关系（故事背景标签）
2、用故事定义身份（故事提出一个因果链条，而淡化其他因果链条）
重要的是展望未来，而不是回顾过去。
3、用案例故事激励或者改变行为
4、将故事作为证据
将一个具体案例外推为普遍规则是一种逻辑谬误
故事最佳的用途是展示一件事情可能具有的情况
小心：
1、在真实事件组成的故事中捏造因果关系的误导者
2、用具体故事证明普遍观点的误传者
引自 第5 章 故事
...........
“如果有人命令所有人将它们认为不光彩的事情集合在一起，然后让每个人将他认为得体的事情从集合中取出，那么集合之中不会剩下任何事情。”
道德是精华而成的鼓励群体内部合作的心理机制。冲突的道德真理定义我们的群体，道德错位可能是故意设计出来的。
道德策略：
1、妖魔化
常见主体：政客、执法官员和新闻工作者
毒品合法化的倡导者要求将毒瘾重新界定为需要治疗的健康问题，而不是应当惩罚的道德污点。
更为现代气息的新描述方法，毒品购买者维持了毒品贸易，这对毒品供应国和传输国造成了巨大的社会和生态破坏，消费者对于全球有害供应链的责任是毒品道德战争的最新战场
2、影响群体道德
公共卫生机构：将群体利益置于个人利益至上的道德真理
穆勒认为，在文明社区，对任何成员实施违背其意志的权力的唯一合理目的是组织对其他人的上海。这些成员本人身体或道德上的利益不足以作为行使这种权力的理由。
3、让道德变得不重要
知名公司的员工也许一开始并不想作恶，但他们逐渐相信，他们的行为在公司环境中是被许可的。（竞争意味）
对策：
通过同理心、激励、逻辑论证以及关于合意性的新定义灌输新的道德真理。
引自 第6 章 道德
.................
情绪激励源：
正面的称之为有吸引力
负面的称之为无吸引力
吸引力的主观性与绝对性区别要注意
例子：
失败对于创业的重要性
农业发展的弊端
吸引力策略：
1、劝说人们喜欢对他们有益的东西
享受预期会改变人们的心理和实际行动
合理建构目标
2、让人们反对一些群体
政治宣传中对移民形象的塑造
注意使你讨厌某些群体的煽动者和其他误导者。
引自 第7 章 吸引力
.............
买卖事物的主要原因在于，我们对于它们具有不同的估价。卖者的估价一般是最低心理预期，买者的估价一般是最高的心理预期，事物的价格在两者区间内，交易完成。
我们购买某物所获得的收益不一定局限于它的直接功能。
影响价值的因素：
1、稀缺性
2、潜在购买风险
3、对自身未来财物的判断
财务价值策略：
1、将所有相关因素包含在主观估值内
（稀缺性、受欢迎程度、利益、风险、未来预期）
例子：
钻石的文化建构
价格信号对主观估值的影响
2、用价格锚和其他技巧影响人
例子：
昂贵的菜单选项——对比
促销的原始零售价
零工经济背后的隐形成本与风险
引自 第8 章 财务价值
...............................
定义策略：
1、根据定义解释情况
2、根据情况歪曲定义
3、通过修改定义转移辩论方向
注意：
对于常用词语使用个人可疑定义的误导者
为了符合重要定义面对情况做出不同解释的误导者
引自 第9 章 定义
.................
国界、欧盟、国际协定、移民法律等，这些因素有个共同点：它们之所以存在，完全是因为我们共同承认它们存在。
我们将这种想象出来的真实事物称为社会建构。它们可能具有物理表现，但它们可以在脱离这些物理表现的情况下完美地存在于我们的头脑中。
真实性不是来自于任何物理实体，而是来自我们的共同承认。它们的含义和力量完全来自我们的共识。只有当足够多的人相信它们时，它们才会获得真实性。
社会建构策略：
1、社会建构的选择性描述
例子：用新的词语定义公司，实际想法就会发生改变。
2、重新定义社会建构
社会建构可以改变，创造和消除。
3、创造或消除社会建构
人权观念的重要性。
我们需要记住，作为人造真相，社会建构是可变的：如果我们不喜欢，我们总是可以联合起来，改变或消除这些社会建构。我们无法改变水的沸点，但我们可以根据意愿改变“欧盟”“比特币”和“社会评级制度”。这些真相的含义和力量完全来自我们的共同承认。
对策：
承认社会建构是我们想象的产物，我们可以在需要时改变它们。
当心：
创造有害社会建构的个人、机构和政府
引自 第10 章 社会建构
..............................
名字会影响到世界看待它的方式
名字策略：
1、用煽动性的名字游说
例子：梅根法案
2、用负面外号来抹黑
例子：老一辈用雪花来描述年轻一代人。
理由：老一辈对各个领域的道德高地被年轻人占有的焦虑。
3、通过改变名字来改变感知
例子：泥虫被命名为小龙虾
词语本身可以在词典上找到，但是带有情绪的词语可以改变命运，改变我们所知道的生活。我们知道，词语和情绪的组合是人类已知的最强大的力量。
小心：
煽动性的名字
破坏性外号
改变辩论措辞改变结果
引自 第11章 名字
................................
沟通者可以像处理部分真相那样忽略和混淆预测。
预测策略：
1.选择性预测
预测的提出会对它的实现产生影响
2、通过预测阻止某事
条件性预测具有自我实现性，也具有自我避免性。
3、通过预测使某事发生
选择应对方式的唯一途径就是预测未来
引自 第12章 预测
.........................
信仰无法证明
信仰不限于宗教和崇拜，在科学当中也存在。
信仰策略：
1、鼓励遵从
顺从群体
2、隔离和控制
3、重复
4、圣书的选择性解释
引自 第13章 信仰
思维模式是指我们关于自己和周围世界的一组信念、思想和意见。我们的思维模式决定了我们对于事物的看法以及我们选择的行为。
实证性偏差：我们往往更容易接受与我们思维模式相符的真相，抗拒那些与我们内心观点相冲突的真相。
政治顾问：同新问题相比，选民对老问题的容忍度要大得多。如果无人驾驶汽车系统故障导致几百人在道路上死亡，即使交通事故的死亡总人数下降，这在政治上可能也是不可接受的。
我们从几个狭窄的渠道了解新闻和意见。我们往往会和想法一致的朋友或同事讨论问题。证实性偏差是普遍存在的。我们会下意识地滤除与我们的想法存在冲突的思想或数据。因此，我们很容易对非常重要的问题做出极具选择性的描绘。在许多问题上，我们只能听到很小的一部分竞争性真相。
“我们的看法涉及的空间、时间和事物超出了我们的直接观察范围。因此，我们不得不根据其他人的说法和我们的想象把它们拼接在一起。”
考虑沟通的道德维度。
本书的四个部分：
片面真相——背景是至关重要的。故事已经成为我们主要的沟通形式，但我们的故事必然会遗漏许多相关细节。
主观真相——态度与价值判断
人造真相——人为创造
未知真相——预测未来
生活是极为复杂的，你不可能看到整个画面。
我们别无选择，只能去简化和选择。
复杂性策略：
1、忽略——往往一两个关键真相会占据你的意识，是什么，这取决于你的选择。
2、混淆——面对令人不快的真相，将其淹没在其他大量的真相之中。但是从本质上说，其他的真相并不会缓和那个令人不快的真相。
3、关联——暗示关联。
对策：
考虑谈话的群体具有怎样的多样性、复杂性和矛盾性
判断标准：
只要我们选择强调的角度能够比较准确地呈现我们知道的事实（支持但不会歪曲所传达的现实的真相），那么简化和选择对于沟通者和听众都是一件好事。
引自 第1 章 复杂性
............................
物体并不仅仅是物体——它拥有背景，这影响了我们对它的看法。
原作的巨大价值不在于它的物理实体本身，而是在于它的背景——它的来源、故事、品牌、稀缺性、独特性。人们受到背景标签的影响。
通过强调某个背景，忽视其他背景，我们在听众开始思考相关问题之前有效地改变了他们的思维模式。
背景策略：
1、设置背景
框架错位使妥协不可能达成，有时，我们甚至很��听到与我们当前框架不符的信息。
这种框架也被称为“世界观”，很多人甚至没有意识到。
2、忽略相关背景
对策：
我们需要确保自己了解最贴切的背景。
引自 第3 章 背景
.....................
本章的主题是复杂性，但它的观点很简单：我们面对的大多数问题和实体过于复杂，无法得到完整描述；我们不得不表述片面真相，因为生活过于复杂，我们无法做出全面的表述。因此，倡导者和误导者可以通过选择支持个人意图的真相来影响现实。我们应该对政客、评论家和社会活动家保持警惕，因为他们一定会呈现出最适合自己的局部，而不是向我们展示整个画面。同时，我们也有机会从复杂的主题中选择简单的真相，从而更加有效地表达自己。只要我们选择强调的角度能够比较准确地呈现我们知道的事实，那么简化和选择对于沟通者和听众都是一件好事。
引自 第一章 复杂性
.........................
我们将会看到，各行各业有经验的沟通者会通过片面的事实、数字、背景、吸引力和道德呈现某种世界观，从而影响事实。
我们都在通过不同的视角看待世界，这些视角很大程度上是由我们听到和读到的不同真相塑造而成的。
20世纪伟大的政治新闻记者沃尔特.李普曼写道：我们的看法涉及的空间、时间和事物超出了我们的直接观察范围。因此我们不得不根据其他人的说法和我们的想象将它们拼接在一起。
英国广播公司播音员埃文.戴维斯指出：事实上，说谎常常是没有必要的，你可以在不使用谎言的情况下完成许多有效的欺骗。
引自 前言
...........................
数字是神奇的。它们可以提供语言常常无法提供的关于世界的清晰度。我们可以用数字来比较、评价事物，测量变化，总结出一个人物的一系列优秀品质。数字可以被任何文化中的任何人理解。它是一种世界语言。问题在于，我们许多人在很多时候对数字存在误解。即使是两个接受过统计学培训的科学家也看不出他们自己的数字说明了什么，难怪那么多人会数字的含义感到困惑。
数字策略：
1、选择有利单位
包装呈现的数字可能在暗示数字很大
2、使数字看上去变大或变小
百分率往往比数字本身提供更多信息（添加了总体的信息）
百分率也可能是我们忽略只占某事物很小比例的事物，尽管其绝对数字可能很大。
要想让数字变大，只需要把时间线拉长（算时间线上的总额）
3、隐藏或夸大趋势
将数字在有利的轴线上描绘
4、挑选统计量
辛普森悖论的关键是识别群体和子群体的差异
对策：
1、理解每个数字代表什么
2、选择最贴切的单位
3、把数字放到背景里
引自 第4 章 数字
...........................
故事是对变化过程的选择性连贯叙述，强调局面和事件之间的因果关系。
故事三要素：变化过程+因果关系+触发事件
故事的价值：使复杂的事物变得连贯清晰。
故事的问题：无法给出完整的画面，只是片面真相
（叙事谬误：我们在不编织解释或强行拼凑逻辑链条的情况下观察事实序列的能力存在局限。）
故事策略：
1、通过连接事实暗示因果关系（故事背景标签）
2、用故事定义身份（故事提出一个因果链条，而淡化其他因果链条）
重要的是展望未来，而不是回顾过去。
3、用案例故事激励或者改变行为
4、将故事作为证据
将一个具体案例外推为普遍规则是一种逻辑谬误
故事最佳的用途是展示一件事情可能具有的情况
小心：
1、在真实事件组成的故事中捏造因果关系的误导者
2、用具体故事证明普遍观点的误传者
引自 第5 章 故事
...........
“如果有人命令所有人将它们认为不光彩的事情集合在一起，然后让每个人将他认为得体的事情从集合中取出，那么集合之中不会剩下任何事情。”
道德是精华而成的鼓励群体内部合作的心理机制。冲突的道德真理定义我们的群体，道德错位可能是故意设计出来的。
道德策略：
1、妖魔化
常见主体：政客、执法官员和新闻工作者
毒品合法化的倡导者要求将毒瘾重新界定为需要治疗的健康问题，而不是应当惩罚的道德污点。
更为现代气息的新描述方法，毒品购买者维持了毒品贸易，这对毒品供应国和传输国造成了巨大的社会和生态破坏，消费者对于全球有害供应链的责任是毒品道德战争的最新战场
2、影响群体道德
公共卫生机构：将群体利益置于个人利益至上的道德真理
穆勒认为，在文明社区，对任何成员实施违背其意志的权力的唯一合理目的是组织对其他人的上海。这些成员本人身体或道德上的利益不足以作为行使这种权力的理由。
3、让道德变得不重要
知名公司的员工也许一开始并不想作恶，但他们逐渐相信，他们的行为在公司环境中是被许可的。（竞争意味）
对策：
通过同理心、激励、逻辑论证以及关于合意性的新定义灌输新的道德真理。
引自 第6 章 道德
.................
情绪激励源：
正面的称之为有吸引力
负面的称之为无吸引力
吸引力的主观性与绝对性区别要注意
例子：
失败对于创业的重要性
农业发展的弊端
吸引力策略：
1、劝说人们喜欢对他们有益的东西
享受预期会改变人们的心理和实际行动
合理建构目标
2、让人们反对一些群体
政治宣传中对移民形象的塑造
注意使你讨厌某些群体的煽动者和其他误导者。
引自 第7 章 吸引力
.............
买卖事物的主要原因在于，我们对于它们具有不同的估价。卖者的估价一般是最低心理预期，买者的估价一般是最高的心理预期，事物的价格在两者区间内，交易完成。
我们购买某物所获得的收益不一定局限于它的直接功能。
影响价值的因素：
1、稀缺性
2、潜在购买风险
3、对自身未来财物的判断
财务价值策略：
1、将所有相关因素包含在主观估值内
（稀缺性、受欢迎程度、利益、风险、未来预期）
例子：
钻石的文化建构
价格信号对主观估值的影响
2、用价格锚和其他技巧影响人
例子：
昂贵的菜单选项——对比
促销的原始零售价
零工经济背后的隐形成本与风险
引自 第8 章 财务价值
...............................
定义策略：
1、根据定义解释情况
2、根据情况歪曲定义
3、通过修改定义转移辩论方向
注意：
对于常用词语使用个人可疑定义的误导者
为了符合重要定义面对情况做出不同解释的误导者
引自 第9 章 定义
.................
国界、欧盟、国际协定、移民法律等，这些因素有个共同点：它们之所以存在，完全是因为我们共同承认它们存在。
我们将这种想象出来的真实事物称为社会建构。它们可能具有物理表现，但它们可以在脱离这些物理表现的情况下完美地存在于我们的头脑中。
真实性不是来自于任何物理实体，而是来自我们的共同承认。它们的含义和力量完全来自我们的共识。只有当足够多的人相信它们时，它们才会获得真实性。
社会建构策略：
1、社会建构的选择性描述
例子：用新的词语定义公司，实际想法就会发生改变。
2、重新定义社会建构
社会建构可以改变，创造和消除。
3、创造或消除社会建构
人权观念的重要性。
我们需要记住，作为人造真相，社会建构是可变的：如果我们不喜欢，我们总是可以联合起来，改变或消除这些社会建构。我们无法改变水的沸点，但我们可以根据意愿改变“欧盟”“比特币”和“社会评级制度”。这些真相的含义和力量完全来自我们的共同承认。
对策：
承认社会建构是我们想象的产物，我们可以在需要时改变它们。
当心：
创造有害社会建构的个人、机构和政府
引自 第10 章 社会建构
..............................
名字会影响到世界看待它的方式
名字策略：
1、用煽动性的名字游说
例子：梅根法案
2、用负面外号来抹黑
例子：老一辈用雪花来描述年轻一代人。
理由：老一辈对各个领域的道德高地被年轻人占有的焦虑。
3、通过改变名字来改变感知
例子：泥虫被命名为小龙虾
词语本身可以在词典上找到，但是带有情绪的词语可以改变命运，改变我们所知道的生活。我们知道，词语和情绪的组合是人类已知的最强大的力量。
小心：
煽动性的名字
破坏性外号
改变辩论措辞改变结果
引自 第11章 名字
................................
沟通者可以像处理部分真相那样忽略和混淆预测。
预测策略：
1.选择性预测
预测的提出会对它的实现产生影响
2、通过预测阻止某事
条件性预测具有自我实现性，也具有自我避免性。
3、通过预测使某事发生
选择应对方式的唯一途径就是预测未来
引自 第12章 预测
.........................
信仰无法证明
信仰不限于宗教和崇拜，在科学当中也存在。
信仰策略：
1、鼓励遵从
顺从群体
2、隔离和控制
3、重复
4、圣书的选择性解释
引自 第13章 信仰
September 1, 2018
MacDonald, as a business strategy consultant, knows a thing or two about persuasion. And yet his book begs the question, how are our actions affected by our commitment to ‘the truth’? Does our knowing ‘the truth’, even out of many competing truths, affect our subsequent actions? People know the truth about lots of things: driving while texting is dangerous, for example, but this knowledge seems to have limited practical effect. I believe that MacDonald leaves open the question, whether truth, as opposed to its manipulation, can change deleterious behaviors.
Read
March 14, 2018I won this book via Goodreads First Reads. I am an ECE administrator and I look forward to adding this book to the lending library for parents and staff at my school.
August 13, 2020
主要是在講述矛盾真相，有非常多的文字遊戲，拆解和舉例「文字」和「故事」對人心印象的影響，等等。
這一本在講「矛盾真相」的概念其實不算很新，但他的舉例方式還蠻有趣的。他在講案例（故事）的時候會不同的角度呈現不同的真相，但因為選擇的真相不同、表現的方式以及切入角度不同，同樣一件事看起來就有了完全不同的面貌。
他在爬梳脈絡和表現的部份是我覺得全書最有意思的地方。
然後他也提出了他所建議去面對在這個資訊爆炸的年代，面對和處理資訊／（不確定）真相的方式和大原則。
我認為可以把這本攸為媒體識讀的一個簡單進階版去閱讀，還蠻好入口的。
這一本在講「矛盾真相」的概念其實不算很新，但他的舉例方式還蠻有趣的。他在講案例（故事）的時候會不同的角度呈現不同的真相，但因為選擇的真相不同、表現的方式以及切入角度不同，同樣一件事看起來就有了完全不同的面貌。
他在爬梳脈絡和表現的部份是我覺得全書最有意思的地方。
然後他也提出了他所建議去面對在這個資訊爆炸的年代，面對和處理資訊／（不確定）真相的方式和大原則。
我認為可以把這本攸為媒體識讀的一個簡單進階版去閱讀，還蠻好入口的。
Read
May 10, 2020çok iyi yazılmış yav. konular, örnekler ve anlatılmak istenen ilginç .
June 6, 2021
o lectură faaascinantă și obligatorie în era poveștilor false.
January 22, 2021
This book is good at reminding us not to believe everything we read & saw and also reminding don't just look into the title or name of something to develop our thoughts and let it affect your action esp. during the time that big techs dominating the world. They can control what we can see and read, but it may not be true. You should look into more details yourself before doing any actions or giving any speech.
The author of the book gave different examples to illustrate his arguments, which makes the reader can understand the concept easily and can relate to themselves. However, the author didn't deep dive to the examples but only giving some points of the different issues due to the coverage of the book (I believe) and also as he said, he will choose the part that will be helpful for explaining his arguments, therefore, when you read the book, you have to think and don't simply believe everything the author wrote. If you are interested in the topic, you should read more by yourself.
The author of the book gave different examples to illustrate his arguments, which makes the reader can understand the concept easily and can relate to themselves. However, the author didn't deep dive to the examples but only giving some points of the different issues due to the coverage of the book (I believe) and also as he said, he will choose the part that will be helpful for explaining his arguments, therefore, when you read the book, you have to think and don't simply believe everything the author wrote. If you are interested in the topic, you should read more by yourself.
September 28, 2023
An illuminating look at just what truth is and how it can be used--and misused.
MacDonald describes his book's theme as:
MacDonald considers many facets of truth, such as context, statistics, morality, social constructs, and more, offering guidance for constructive conveyance of truth and teaching awareness of how truth can be manipulated in each realm. His writing is clear and effective, and delivers important information in an interesting manner. Recommended.
MacDonald describes his book's theme as:
There is usually more than one true way to talk about something. We can use competing truths constructively to engage people and inspire action, but we should also watch out for communicators who use competing truths to mislead us.He doesn't even get into the business of lies, as there are enough dimensions to truth to keep the waters muddy all on its own. Life is complicated and complex, and the best anyone can hope to perceive and communicate is partial truths from different perspectives through different lenses. Truths regularly compete with and even contradict each other.
MacDonald considers many facets of truth, such as context, statistics, morality, social constructs, and more, offering guidance for constructive conveyance of truth and teaching awareness of how truth can be manipulated in each realm. His writing is clear and effective, and delivers important information in an interesting manner. Recommended.
July 10, 2018
There are some interesting aspects to this book. The author attempts to handle the intricacies of truth and the use of it to mislead. Unfortunately the book begin by relating the obvious. The author then proceeds to present some interesting case studies. I will give him credit for attempting to illustrate multiple facets of the issues he highlights in an evenhanded style. However, I found it distasteful that he betrays his prejudices by ascribing intentions on the proponents of the different facets. If a person uses truth to mislead in the defense of progressive ideologies he identifies this as "well-intentioned". However he deems the same behavior in defense of conservative ideologies "nefarious". This is why I usually avoid reading current book that address political topics; the authors are more interested in their point-of-view than they are with providing fair representations of the issues.
December 22, 2018
The chief imperative of this book is that we must all think critically about the things we see, hear, and read that are being presented to us as truth. Not only must we take care with the truths we consume, but also with the truths we utter. A few times the author is guilty of uttering what he thinks are self-evident truths, when to this reader they are anything but. In particular, his statements about the gender earnings gap. The earnings gap may be true, but only in the broadest sense. His statement about the gap is freighted with an unspoken assumption that this gap is entirely due to systematic discrimination against women by men, an assumption I do not share.
I know it wasn't the purpose of the book to examine this particular issue in detail, but by making this broad statement absent all context, the author has become what he is constantly warning the reader to avoid: a misinformer, perhaps even a misleader.
I know it wasn't the purpose of the book to examine this particular issue in detail, but by making this broad statement absent all context, the author has become what he is constantly warning the reader to avoid: a misinformer, perhaps even a misleader.
March 20, 2019
Marvelous take on the truth. We take truth as something absolute. This book takes that concept and shatters it to pieces. Today's problem be it political, business or societal are plagued by different versions of truth. The book explores in detail where to spot what. What is the most compelling positive truth and what is a harmful negative one. It's a good read for everyone who's interested in understanding how communicators use words to make a meaningful impact - for better or worse. Some of the examples used in the book are spot on and enlightening. In the age of social media, the onus is on every individual to do due diligence before believing in any truth. Last but not the least it gives a God understanding on how a particular scenario is understood by different stakeholders. Must read for all the armchair politicians, activists, etc who are fast to pounce on and propogate various forms of truth.
February 25, 2019
Amazing Book! This book is about truth. Though truth is not as straightforward as it seems. There are different ways to speak truth, not all of them honest!
There is so much information out there now, coming at us from so many varied sources.Moreover we can no longer rely on press and media houses to curate the world’s information for us and tell us which truth is more relevant and which is misleading. There are no gatekeepers any more. We have to do it for ourselves and help those around us do it too.
The book contains many examples of how time and again politicians, marketers, journalists, campaigners and bureaucrats have misled us with ....truth!
Notable quotes
"There is no worse lie than a truth misunderstood by those who hear it"
"It’s a popular saying: ‘There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics"
There is so much information out there now, coming at us from so many varied sources.Moreover we can no longer rely on press and media houses to curate the world’s information for us and tell us which truth is more relevant and which is misleading. There are no gatekeepers any more. We have to do it for ourselves and help those around us do it too.
The book contains many examples of how time and again politicians, marketers, journalists, campaigners and bureaucrats have misled us with ....truth!
Notable quotes
"There is no worse lie than a truth misunderstood by those who hear it"
"It’s a popular saying: ‘There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics"
July 5, 2021
This book is a pretty nice compilation of all the various was that the truth can be misrepresented. This is particularly timely given all of the issues in the past several years with "fake news", "conspiracy theories" and "alternative facts". There isn't a lot of earth-shattering new ground covered here but the examples that the author uses are quite illustrative and drive home the points he strives to make. I think that everyone would benefit from reading this book (assuming that the reader is one who wants to be able to critically appraise the information being presented to her/him). It really highlights the need to obtain ones news and information from multiple sources and to also have a strong sense of the potential agenda(s) that may be behind any particular source. Too often, unfortunately, people seem to take things at "face value" and get led astray.
February 6, 2023
This is an excellent book that examines the emergence of “half-truths” and what we can do to cope with them.
MadDonald’s book can be categorized as in a similar category to neuroscience, and I found it to be only slightly less enjoyable than books by authors like Gladwell, Mlodinow, and Tetlock.
The author argues that the recently increased number of half-truths is due to the increased pace of technology and change in general, the information overload we must deal with, and most importantly (and related to it) our decreased attention span. He highlights the existence of “competing truths,” differentiates between “advocate/misinformer/misleader”, how presentation of a “fact” through use of numbers, allegories, or by appealing to the emotional side can alter our perception.
In short, it is a book that aims to teach critical thinking.
MadDonald’s book can be categorized as in a similar category to neuroscience, and I found it to be only slightly less enjoyable than books by authors like Gladwell, Mlodinow, and Tetlock.
The author argues that the recently increased number of half-truths is due to the increased pace of technology and change in general, the information overload we must deal with, and most importantly (and related to it) our decreased attention span. He highlights the existence of “competing truths,” differentiates between “advocate/misinformer/misleader”, how presentation of a “fact” through use of numbers, allegories, or by appealing to the emotional side can alter our perception.
In short, it is a book that aims to teach critical thinking.
October 24, 2019
Nice read and very thought-provoking. What I gather from the read is that I should not jump into conclusions and take truths as absolute but pay attention to why the truth was stated, by whom, when and in what context. The book talks about the many facets of truth and how we should always question it and try to see the bigger picture and know what other contradicting truths are being obfuscated, this is so that we could be better informed about a topic and not be used as pawns. This book also talks about beliefs and their power. Words and their interpretation and how the marketing industry is using words to sell and change the perspective of consumers. It is a very interesting and good read.
June 25, 2018
I’ve read this book in a day while being sleep deprived for travel reasons so I might not have been in the best conditions to evaluate this book. However, the language used is very clear and the author skilfully explores the different truth bending devices used by master « misleaders » (his word, not mine) but which can also serve a better purpose. Through concrete examples he casts light on the fact that often a situation can have competing truths depending on context/beliefs/data/predictions etc.
Some chapters are a bit long and unrelated to the topic at hand. If you’ve enjoyed books by Dan Ariely or other behavioural scientists then you will enjoy this one.
Some chapters are a bit long and unrelated to the topic at hand. If you’ve enjoyed books by Dan Ariely or other behavioural scientists then you will enjoy this one.
August 17, 2018
Despite the title Truth is a how-to of how to lie creatively. The author helps corporations with internal advertising (for example aiding in getting employees on board with a controversial company-wide undertaking) and most of the book is written as a guidebook for people with similar career aspirations, with a lot of time also spent doling out advice on how to catch on to and avoid falling for various manipulation techniques.
Many chapters' topics feel more like common sense than insight, to the point that some are borderline condescending. If it's news to you that politicians can employ statistics to obscure the effects of their policies there are far better sources to correct the education system's failure to prepare you for adult life. Most people are going to breeze through the book and find little of value. I finished Truth about a week ago and had trouble recalling much of anything of note before skimming through it to write this review.
Still, there are some interesting anecdotes peppered throughout the book. In a chapter on context Macdonald points out that the response to Hurricane Katrina can be convincingly spun as either a massive failure on the part of the government or a case study for the benefits of privatizing disaster response. A chapter on interpretation discusses how Ghandi based his pacifist philosophy on the same religious text that others used to justify violence. A chapter on definitions explains why the Clinton White House labeled the mass killing of Tutsi in Rwanda as "acts of genocide" instead of plain old "genocide," a memorable lesson to always question why messages are delivered in particular ways.
Are the occasional fun stories worth slogging through the boring bits? Not especially, but they were intriguing enough that I don't regret having read the book. Consider the score rounded up from a 2.5.
Many chapters' topics feel more like common sense than insight, to the point that some are borderline condescending. If it's news to you that politicians can employ statistics to obscure the effects of their policies there are far better sources to correct the education system's failure to prepare you for adult life. Most people are going to breeze through the book and find little of value. I finished Truth about a week ago and had trouble recalling much of anything of note before skimming through it to write this review.
Still, there are some interesting anecdotes peppered throughout the book. In a chapter on context Macdonald points out that the response to Hurricane Katrina can be convincingly spun as either a massive failure on the part of the government or a case study for the benefits of privatizing disaster response. A chapter on interpretation discusses how Ghandi based his pacifist philosophy on the same religious text that others used to justify violence. A chapter on definitions explains why the Clinton White House labeled the mass killing of Tutsi in Rwanda as "acts of genocide" instead of plain old "genocide," a memorable lesson to always question why messages are delivered in particular ways.
Are the occasional fun stories worth slogging through the boring bits? Not especially, but they were intriguing enough that I don't regret having read the book. Consider the score rounded up from a 2.5.
May 12, 2021
My difficulty in rating this book is that it isn’t the type of book I generally read. This book was recommended to me by someone with a sales and marketing background and from that perspective, it a very good book on how people manipulate information. The author sums up the theme of his book on page 204 “This book is about ‘selective’ truth-telling”. Overall, an interesting read loaded with many interesting examples to illustrate the author’s perspective. If you are approaching the subject of truth from a philosophical standpoint and want to answer the question “what is truth?”, you are reading this review on an electronic device. That is absolute truth.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 89 reviews