Fake News vs. Echo Chambers

Social Epistemology 35 (6):645-659 (2021)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

I argue that there is a prima facie tension between solutions to the problem of fake news and solutions to the problem presented by various cognitive biases that dispose us to dismiss evidence against our prior beliefs (what might seem to be the driving force behind echo chambers). We can guard against fake news by strengthening belief. But we can exit echo chambers by becoming more sensitive to counterevidence, which seems to require weakening our beliefs. I resolve the tension by arguing against an injunction to weaken belief in the required ways. In particular, there is no injunction to be open-minded in all circumstances toward various counterarguments, even those whose premises seem compelling and in which we can’t expose a flaw. On the contrary, there are circumstances in which you should, in the relevant sense, be closed-minded toward such counterarguments.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,611

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Echo chambers and epistemic bubbles.C. Thi Nguyen - 2020 - Episteme 17 (2):141-161.
What is fake news?M. R. X. Dentith - 2018 - University of Bucharest Review (2):24-34.
What is fake news?Romy Jaster & David Lanius - 2018 - Versus 2 (127):207-227.
Fake News: A Definition.Axel Gelfert - 2018 - Informal Logic 38 (1):84-117.
Speaking of Fake News: Definitions and Dimensions.Romy Jaster & David Lanius - 2021 - In Sven Bernecker, Amy K. Flowerree & Thomas Grundmann (eds.), The Epistemology of Fake News. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. pp. 19-45.
Why we should keep talking about fake news.Jessica Pepp, Eliot Michaelson & Rachel Sterken - forthcoming - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 65 (4):471-487.
Echo Chambers, Ignorance and Domination.Breno R. G. Santos - 2021 - Social Epistemology 35 (2):109-119.
The Problem of Fake News.M. R. X. Dentith - 2016 - Public Reason 8 (1-2):65-79.
Free Speech and the Legal Prohibition of Fake News.Étienne Brown - 2023 - Social Theory and Practice 49 (1):29-55.
Pragmatist Media Ethics and the Challenges of Fake News.Scott R. Stroud - 2019 - Journal of Media Ethics 34 (4):178-192.
Stop Talking about Fake News!Joshua Habgood-Coote - 2019 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 62 (9-10):1033-1065.

Analytics

Added to PP
2021-07-03

Downloads
202 (#100,569)

6 months
50 (#89,794)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Jeremy Fantl
University of Calgary

Citations of this work

What’s so bad about echo chambers?Christopher Ranalli & Finlay Malcom - forthcoming - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy.
Echo Chambers.M. Giulia Napolitano - forthcoming - In Kurt Sylvan, Ernest Sosa, Jonathan Dancy & Matthias Steup (eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Epistemology, 3rd edition. Wiley Blackwell.

View all 7 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Echo chambers and epistemic bubbles.C. Thi Nguyen - 2020 - Episteme 17 (2):141-161.
Knowledge in an uncertain world.Jeremy Fantl & Matthew McGrath - 2009 - New York: Oxford University Press. Edited by Matthew McGrath.
Compassionate phenomenal conservatism.Michael Huemer - 2007 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 74 (1):30–55.
Fake News and Partisan Epistemology.Regina Rini - 2017 - Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal 27 (S2):43-64.

View all 30 references / Add more references