Skip to Main Content

FYS 1068: Skepticism in the Information Age

Resources and information relevant to the topics covered in FYS 1068.

Points of View

We live in an age in which the borders between fact, opinion and partial fact have been blurred to the point where it's hard to tell one from the others. For example, if we know for sure the date of the Pearl Harbor Attack (December 7, 1941), the causes are still interpretable. We cannot argue a fact, namely that the attack happened on a particular date, but we can argue about the causes. However, even this argumentation needs to follow some rules: is there enough evidence to verify one explanation or another? Does the evidence come from reliable, impartial sources? Has it been accepted or not by the academic establishment? If it hasn't, why is that? With so many conspiracy theories out there, we have to be careful if we deal with interpretations that have no basis in reality or only partial basis in reality.

At the same time, we can argue about which food is the best. This is an opinion and, in principle, opinions are all equal because there is no objective, verifiable criterion for establishing what best food represents. It is a matter of taste. But if we make the argument about the healthiness of a food over another we move into verifiable territory and we can have more informed, fact-based information.

Always think about the factual character of information, about the partial or impartial character of information, who is behind it, does the source express opinions or truth claims based in fact?

Watch the video below and ask yourself some questions: 1. Who is the person making these claims about global warming? 2. Why is he trying to fight a scientific consensus? 3. What sources of information is he citing? 4. Is the information he provides true, partially true, or false? 5. Where should you go to verify his claims or get some objective information, especially if this is not your field of study?

In our society, we are constantly confronted with opposite viewpoints. We cannot agree on many issues simply because often these issues are relative to value-systems that are not compatible. What do we value more: employment or gainful employment, individual rights or collective rights, safety or freedom, equality or opportunity? These values often inform our debates on a variety of issues, from taxes to gun rights, and from abortion to immigration. While we may believe in some of these values, we should not let them get in the way of acknowledging that facts are facts and they should not be skewed in order to confirm our own assumptions.

Here are some examples of databases that allow you to search for information on such controversial issues as climate change action, gun control, abortion, etc.,  while still maintaining an objective distance and recognizing that there are multiple points of view.

Master List of Logical Fallacies

Look at the list of fallacies and select one that you have encountered before. In what context?

Middle Class

Statistical Sources

List of possible issues to investigate

Violence

GMOs

Migration

Charter Schools

Universal Health Care

Free Trade

Student Debt

Mass transit

Marijuana

Others--Browse for Issues