Philosophy Now Forum

Hi there,

My post concerns the notion of "Covid Misinformation" and the idea that it should be suppressed and censored.

On the one hand there is the idea that the proliferation of misinformation about Covid has lead to much illness and many deaths around the world as people, acting on this misinformation, don't take the necessary precautions that would have helped them.

"Covid Misinfirmation" could range from anything including conspiracy/hoax theories and blatant falsehoods to stating things that are not in direct accordance with the prevailing view of the scientific and/or political consensus.

For instance, at one time arguing that Covid originated from a lab in China was considered misinformation but now is accepted as a likely (although still unproven) explanation.

The problem is that all new ideas begin as a minority view (by definition). Any idea that challenges the orthodoxy could be labelled as misinformation and that might hinder our evolution towards a better way to handle the pandemic.

Personally, I think it is better that misinformation is challenged rather than just suppressed and censored. The latter only approach only causes further fragmentation of the debate and forces people into echo chambers where opinions (on both sides) are only ever affirmed and never challenged.

Fried Egg wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 8:51 am Hi there,

My post concerns the notion of "Covid Misinformation" and the idea that it should be suppressed and censored.

On the one hand there is the idea that the proliferation of misinformation about Covid has lead to much illness and many deaths around the world as people, acting on this misinformation, don't take the necessary precautions that would have helped them.

"Covid Misinfirmation" could range from anything including conspiracy/hoax theories and blatant falsehoods to stating things that are not in direct accordance with the prevailing view of the scientific and/or political consensus.

For instance, at one time arguing that Covid originated from a lab in China was considered misinformation but now is accepted as a likely (although still unproven) explanation.

The problem is that all new ideas begin as a minority view (by definition). Any idea that challenges the orthodoxy could be labelled as misinformation and that might hinder our evolution towards a better way to handle the pandemic.

Personally, I think it is better that misinformation is challenged rather than just suppressed and censored. The latter only approach only causes further fragmentation of the debate and forces people into echo chambers where opinions (on both sides) are only ever affirmed and never challenged.

I think the highlighted paragraph is a good point. As far as Covid originating from a lab in China, according to this article, it's possible, however, "likely" may not be an accurate assessment.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 12:37 am
As far as Covid originating from a lab in China, according to this article, it's possible, however, "likely" may not be an accurate assessment.

Your article is from the Springer Nature Group, created by a merger in 2015*. A Wiki comment suggests their editorial decisions are either politically biased or influenced by politics.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Springer_Nature

Controversies[edit]
In 2017, the company agreed to block access to hundreds of articles on its Chinese site, cutting off access to articles on Tibet, Taiwan, and China's political elite.[24][25]

In August 2020, Springer Nature was reported to have rejected the publication of an article at the behest of its co-publisher, Wenzhou Medical University, from a Taiwanese doctor because the word "China" was not placed after "Taiwan."[27][28]

Fried Egg wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 8:51 am Hi there,

My post concerns the notion of "Covid Misinformation" and the idea that it should be suppressed and censored.

Is there ANY 'misinformation' that should NOT be suppressed and censored?

Is there ANY one who thinks or BELIEVES that 'misinformation' should be shared and expressed unaltered?

Fried Egg wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 8:51 am On the one hand there is the idea that the proliferation of misinformation about Covid has lead to much illness and many deaths around the world as people, acting on this misinformation, don't take the necessary precautions that would have helped them.

"Covid Misinfirmation" could range from anything including conspiracy/hoax theories and blatant falsehoods to stating things that are not in direct accordance with the prevailing view of the scientific and/or political consensus.

ANY 'misinformation' could include ANY of these things.

Fried Egg wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 8:51 am For instance, at one time arguing that Covid originated from a lab in China was considered misinformation but now is accepted as a likely (although still unproven) explanation.

Informing people that 'covid' originated from a lab in "china", and that this is ACCEPTED as a likely explanation, may well be one of the GREATEST forms of MISINFORMATION shared and expressed, and especially considering the Fact that 'that information' is STILL completely and utterly UNPROVEN.

Also, who or what is that CLAIM 'accepted', in relation to, EXACTLY?

Fried Egg wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 8:51 am
The problem is that all new ideas begin as a minority view (by definition).

So, is there in SOME dictionary existing 'a definition' for 'new ideas', begin within a minority?

If no, then WHY say, "by definition"?

But if yes, then WHICH dictionary has 'that definition'?

Fried Egg wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 8:51 am Any idea that challenges the orthodoxy could be labelled as misinformation and that might hinder our evolution towards a better way to handle the pandemic.

ANY idea that challenges ANY thing could be labelled as 'misinformation', which might then hinder human beings finding a BETTER WAY for ANY thing.

But this GIVING and PROVIDING 'misinformation', in the days when this is being written, is just where human beings ARE/WERE, along the evolution ladder.

When human beings 'grow up, 'mature', or 'evolve' enough, then they WILL and DO STOP providing, giving out, and sharing misinformation, like, for example, information about where viruses COULD HAVE began WITHOUT thee ACTUAL and IRREFUTABLE PROOF.

When Truly MATURED human beings WAIT until ACTUAL PROOF and/or CLARIFICATION has been OBTAINED and GAINED, FIRST, BEFORE spreading ANY rumors or ANY misinformation.

Fried Egg wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 8:51 am Personally, I think it is better that misinformation is challenged rather than just suppressed and censored.

'Personally', I KNOW it is better that ALL misinformation is NOT spread NOR shared AT ALL, and ONLY what thee ACTUAL Truth is is SAID, and SHARED.

But each to their own.

Fried Egg wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 8:51 am The latter only approach only causes further fragmentation of the debate and forces people into echo chambers where opinions (on both sides) are only ever affirmed and never challenged.

If one KNOWS that 'it' is MISINFORMATION, then WHY SHARE 'it', in the beginning?

And MISINFORMATION, by definition, does NOT need CHALLENGING. As 'it' is MISINFORMATION and thus NOT True, NOT Right, AND NOT Correct anyway.

Also, and by the way, 'debate' ENDS and STOPS completely when human beings have evolved ENOUGH.

Furthermore, when human beings have evolved, ENOUGH, there are NO "sides", only Truth is EXPRESSED, and SHARED.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 12:37 am

Fried Egg wrote: ↑Fri Aug 12, 2022 8:51 am Hi there,

My post concerns the notion of "Covid Misinformation" and the idea that it should be suppressed and censored.

On the one hand there is the idea that the proliferation of misinformation about Covid has lead to much illness and many deaths around the world as people, acting on this misinformation, don't take the necessary precautions that would have helped them.

"Covid Misinfirmation" could range from anything including conspiracy/hoax theories and blatant falsehoods to stating things that are not in direct accordance with the prevailing view of the scientific and/or political consensus.

For instance, at one time arguing that Covid originated from a lab in China was considered misinformation but now is accepted as a likely (although still unproven) explanation.

The problem is that all new ideas begin as a minority view (by definition). Any idea that challenges the orthodoxy could be labelled as misinformation and that might hinder our evolution towards a better way to handle the pandemic.

Personally, I think it is better that misinformation is challenged rather than just suppressed and censored. The latter only approach only causes further fragmentation of the debate and forces people into echo chambers where opinions (on both sides) are only ever affirmed and never challenged.

I think the highlighted paragraph is a good point. As far as Covid originating from a lab in China, according to this article, it's possible, however, "likely" may not be an accurate assessment.

OF COURSE it is POSSIBLE.

One, REALLY, does NOT need to read an article to CONCLUDE that 'it is POSSIBLE', do they?

If thee Truth be known, and considering the Fact that "china's" monetary wealth has been built on GREED and 'you', adult human beings, LUST for "cheap material stuff", then "china" wanting to manufacture a virus, in a lab, and spreading it around the world, when the products, which are created in "china", could then NOT be bought, goes completely AGAINST any REAL 'logic'.

However, and on the other hand, the people of "america" had a LOT to gain if they were to manufacture a virus, start its spread in a country, which was taking away a LOT of their 'monetary wealth', and which could have wiped out considerably the manufacturing capabilities of that country.

But that is CERTAINLY NOT ANY information that the country of "america" would SHARE and EXPRESS, nor which the FOLLOWERS of 'that country' would SHARE and EXPRESS, EITHER. But, if one wants to LOOK FOR and FIND thee ACTUAL Truth, then they need to LOOK AT ALL 'things', and NOT just SOME 'things'.

Walker wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 10:29 am

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 12:37 am
As far as Covid originating from a lab in China, according to this article, it's possible, however, "likely" may not be an accurate assessment.

Your article is from the Springer Nature Group, created by a merger in 2015*. A Wiki comment suggests their editorial decisions are either politically biased or influenced by politics.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Springer_Nature

Controversies[edit]
In 2017, the company agreed to block access to hundreds of articles on its Chinese site, cutting off access to articles on Tibet, Taiwan, and China's political elite.[24][25]

In August 2020, Springer Nature was reported to have rejected the publication of an article at the behest of its co-publisher, Wenzhou Medical University, from a Taiwanese doctor because the word "China" was not placed after "Taiwan."[27][28]

Certainly a good catch. I suppose that's what happens when private companies get hold of what used to be the world's leading scientific journal. I would think you should be happy, though--capitalism at work. Is it not?

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 1:13 pm

Walker wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 10:29 am

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 12:37 am
As far as Covid originating from a lab in China, according to this article, it's possible, however, "likely" may not be an accurate assessment.

Your article is from the Springer Nature Group, created by a merger in 2015*. A Wiki comment suggests their editorial decisions are either politically biased or influenced by politics.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Springer_Nature

Controversies[edit]
In 2017, the company agreed to block access to hundreds of articles on its Chinese site, cutting off access to articles on Tibet, Taiwan, and China's political elite.[24][25]

In August 2020, Springer Nature was reported to have rejected the publication of an article at the behest of its co-publisher, Wenzhou Medical University, from a Taiwanese doctor because the word "China" was not placed after "Taiwan."[27][28]

Certainly a good catch. I suppose that's what happens when private companies get hold of what used to be the world's leading scientific journal. I would think you should be happy, though--capitalism at work. Is it not?

Perhaps the road to wisdom less taken is silent contemplation that mulls and savours the implications of personal gullibility, and its role in creating delusions, conclusions, and a map that leads to pointless questions that are offshoots of the narrative made possible by gullibility.

Age wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 11:19 am
Informing people that 'covid' originated from a lab in "china", and that this is ACCEPTED as a likely explanation, may well be one of the GREATEST forms of MISINFORMATION shared and expressed, and especially considering the Fact that 'that information' is STILL completely and utterly UNPROVEN.

Folks just can't face the statistical fact that Covid-19 cures influenza. The proof? During the Covid-19 outbreak, incidents of influenza dropped to zero. Why do folks persist in ignoring this good news? Covid-19 likely saved uncountable lives by eradicating influenza, although admittedly at the unfortunate cost of countable lives.

Walker wrote: ↑Mon Sep 19, 2022 8:20 am

Age wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 11:19 am
Informing people that 'covid' originated from a lab in "china", and that this is ACCEPTED as a likely explanation, may well be one of the GREATEST forms of MISINFORMATION shared and expressed, and especially considering the Fact that 'that information' is STILL completely and utterly UNPROVEN.

Folks just can't face the statistical fact that Covid-19 cures influenza.

Okay. But I have NO idea how this, supposed, fact relates to ANY thing of mine, which you have quoted here

Walker wrote: ↑Mon Sep 19, 2022 8:20 am The proof? During the Covid-19 outbreak, incidents of influenza dropped to zero.

You say this like ANY one here cares, or that it even would relate to absolutely ANY thing I said or wrote here.

Walker wrote: ↑Mon Sep 19, 2022 8:20 am Why do folks persist in ignoring this good news?

So, the so-called 'good news', to you, is that when a new virus comes along that KILLS people, which then scares or influences people not to congregate like they used to, which in turn slows down the spread of a previous virus, is just some sort of fact that 'folks' persist in ignoring.

Why folks persist to ignore this so-called 'good news' I do NOT know why.

Maybe it is because they do NOT accept that a new virus that KILLS people is really 'good news' at all. I think you will have to ask this so-called 'folks' why they ignore this 'news' or fact.

Do you KNOW WHY you ignore some news and facts?

It might be for the very exact same reason 'folks' ignore news and facts.

Walker wrote: ↑Mon Sep 19, 2022 8:20 am Covid-19 likely saved uncountable lives by eradicating influenza, although admittedly at the unfortunate cost of countable lives.

Are you aware that influenza has NOT been eradicated?

Or, is this just some news or fact that I am IGNORING?

Covid is global warming.

Walker wrote: ↑Mon Sep 19, 2022 8:20 am

Age wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 11:19 am
Informing people that 'covid' originated from a lab in "china", and that this is ACCEPTED as a likely explanation, may well be one of the GREATEST forms of MISINFORMATION shared and expressed, and especially considering the Fact that 'that information' is STILL completely and utterly UNPROVEN.

Folks just can't face the statistical fact that Covid-19 cures influenza. The proof? During the Covid-19 outbreak, incidents of influenza dropped to zero. Why do folks persist in ignoring this good news? Covid-19 likely saved uncountable lives by eradicating influenza, although admittedly at the unfortunate cost of countable lives.

That's an interesting thought. I never thought of that.