公众受害者的神话。民主反对虚假信息

IF 0.2 3区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY FILOZOFIA Pub Date : 2022-12-13 DOI:10.31577/filozofia.2022.77.10.4
Petr Špecián
{"title":"公众受害者的神话。民主反对虚假信息","authors":"Petr Špecián","doi":"10.31577/filozofia.2022.77.10.4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Do people fall for online disinformation, or do they actively utilize it as a tool to accomplish their goals? Currently, the notion of the members of the public as victims of deception and manipulation prevails in the debate. It emphasizes the need to limit people’s exposure to falsehoods and bolster their deficient reasoning faculties. However, the observed epistemic irrationality can also stem from politically motivated reasoning incentivized by digital platforms. In this context, the readily available disinformation facilitates an arms race in loyalty signaling via a public endorsement of fanciful partisan claims. Such a signaling arms race appears capable of derailing democratic decision-making perhaps more effectively than any known reasoning deficiency. Appreciating the role of an instrumentally rational cost-benefit calculus in triggering the disinformation crisis thus appears vital. Examining these themes, the paper contributes to the current debates in political epistemology and democratic theory.","PeriodicalId":44340,"journal":{"name":"FILOZOFIA","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Myth of the Victim Public. Democracy contra Disinformation\",\"authors\":\"Petr Špecián\",\"doi\":\"10.31577/filozofia.2022.77.10.4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Do people fall for online disinformation, or do they actively utilize it as a tool to accomplish their goals? Currently, the notion of the members of the public as victims of deception and manipulation prevails in the debate. It emphasizes the need to limit people’s exposure to falsehoods and bolster their deficient reasoning faculties. However, the observed epistemic irrationality can also stem from politically motivated reasoning incentivized by digital platforms. In this context, the readily available disinformation facilitates an arms race in loyalty signaling via a public endorsement of fanciful partisan claims. Such a signaling arms race appears capable of derailing democratic decision-making perhaps more effectively than any known reasoning deficiency. Appreciating the role of an instrumentally rational cost-benefit calculus in triggering the disinformation crisis thus appears vital. Examining these themes, the paper contributes to the current debates in political epistemology and democratic theory.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44340,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"FILOZOFIA\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"FILOZOFIA\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31577/filozofia.2022.77.10.4\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"FILOZOFIA","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31577/filozofia.2022.77.10.4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

人们是被网上的虚假信息所迷惑,还是积极地利用它作为实现自己目标的工具?目前,公众是欺骗和操纵的受害者的观念在辩论中占主导地位。它强调有必要限制人们接触虚假信息,增强他们有缺陷的推理能力。然而,观察到的认知非理性也可能源于数字平台激励的政治动机推理。在这种情况下,唾手可得的虚假信息通过公众对异想天开的党派主张的认可,促进了忠诚信号的军备竞赛。这种信号军备竞赛似乎能够比任何已知的推理缺陷更有效地破坏民主决策。因此,认识到工具理性成本效益计算在引发虚假信息危机中的作用似乎至关重要。研究这些主题,本文有助于当前政治认识论和民主理论的辩论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Myth of the Victim Public. Democracy contra Disinformation
Do people fall for online disinformation, or do they actively utilize it as a tool to accomplish their goals? Currently, the notion of the members of the public as victims of deception and manipulation prevails in the debate. It emphasizes the need to limit people’s exposure to falsehoods and bolster their deficient reasoning faculties. However, the observed epistemic irrationality can also stem from politically motivated reasoning incentivized by digital platforms. In this context, the readily available disinformation facilitates an arms race in loyalty signaling via a public endorsement of fanciful partisan claims. Such a signaling arms race appears capable of derailing democratic decision-making perhaps more effectively than any known reasoning deficiency. Appreciating the role of an instrumentally rational cost-benefit calculus in triggering the disinformation crisis thus appears vital. Examining these themes, the paper contributes to the current debates in political epistemology and democratic theory.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
FILOZOFIA
FILOZOFIA PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
66.70%
发文量
31
期刊介绍: Filozofia publishes original articles in a wide range of areas including metaphysics, epistemology, history of philosophy, social and political philosophy, philosophy of mind, ethics, philosophy of religion and related disciplines. The journal is published monthly, with the exception of July and August, i.e. ten issues yearly. The articles are accepted in Slovak, Czech and English languages.
期刊最新文献
Capitalism, Communism, Environmentalism, and the Ideology of Freedom Internal History of Philosophy Climate Activism, Sovereignty, and the Role of States: Envisioning Post-Liberal Climate Governance Freedom in the Anthropocene: Bringing Political Philosophy to Global Environmental Problems On Global Environmental Citizenship in the Context of the Anthropocene and the Deepening Environmental Crisis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1