←back to thread

Learning not to trust the All-In podcast

(passingtime.substack.com)
460 points paulpauper | 5 comments | | HN request time: 0.885s | source
Show context
newfocogi ◴[] No.42066957[source]
In this age of endless expertise, it's easy to be fooled into thinking someone is a true authority until you hear them speak on a topic you know well. There's a certain thrill in getting a glimpse behind the curtain, seeing the man (or woman) behind the rhetoric. While I tell myself that 40% of what they say is just made up or misinterpreted, I can't help but keep listening, captivated by the illusion of insight. Even when we know better, the siren song of perceived wisdom is hard to resist. At the end of the day, true expertise is rarer than we'd like to admit - but the fantasy is always enticing.
replies(5): >>42067248 #>>42072639 #>>42072823 #>>42076713 #>>42081308 #
1. swyx ◴[] No.42067248[source]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gell-Mann_amnesia_effect
replies(2): >>42069953 #>>42084866 #
2. deskr ◴[] No.42069953[source]
Wow, I didn't know this effect had a name. I've experienced it so many times.

I've also seen how politicians lie and tell half truths about stuff, where I know the full story like them.

replies(1): >>42070173 #
3. TApplencourt ◴[] No.42070173[source]
It was in the article...
replies(1): >>42070382 #
4. deskr ◴[] No.42070382{3}[source]
Shows that it's not safe to assume that a random Besserwisser on HN has read the article. In my defence I did skim through it though.
5. musicale ◴[] No.42084866[source]
I consider it the cost of information rather than amnesia.

When I read articles about something that I don't know much about, I usually don't have time to fact-check everything individually if it's not obviously wrong and seems to be plausibly presented, so I use it as a base theory until I receive evidence to the contrary - while knowing that it is likely still full of errors.