Difference between revisions of "Deliberate ignorance"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Reverted edits by Colin O'Munism (talk) to last revision by GregG)
(Undo revision 1273290 by Pohytrvbj (talk))
(2 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 18: Line 18:
 
* Pushing a "scientific" theory for political purposes or because it fits one's belief system or preconceived notions, while [[no true Scotsman|dismissing actual scientific evidence]] that discredits the theory
 
* Pushing a "scientific" theory for political purposes or because it fits one's belief system or preconceived notions, while [[no true Scotsman|dismissing actual scientific evidence]] that discredits the theory
  
Common expressions of [[deliberate ignorance]] include:
+
Common expressions of '''deliberate ignorance''' include:
  
 
*"I find that hard to believe!" (Howard Dean, June 11, 2008, in response to a fact ignored by [[liberals]]<ref>http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/015/210vssua.asp?</ref>)
 
*"I find that hard to believe!" (Howard Dean, June 11, 2008, in response to a fact ignored by [[liberals]]<ref>http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/015/210vssua.asp?</ref>)
Line 26: Line 26:
 
* "Let's talk about something else!"
 
* "Let's talk about something else!"
 
* "I'm not interested in that!"
 
* "I'm not interested in that!"
* "That [[Logical_fallacy#Appeal_to_pity|offends me]]!" (used as an excuse not to consider facts or logic)
+
* "That [[Logical fallacy#Appeal to pity|offends me]]!" (used as an excuse not to consider facts or logic)
 
* "You're persecuting me!" (when the "persecution" consists only of pointing out inconvenient facts or logic)
 
* "You're persecuting me!" (when the "persecution" consists only of pointing out inconvenient facts or logic)
 
* "That's not true in my experience," with the implication that it therefore [[black-swan fallacy|cannot be true at all]]
 
* "That's not true in my experience," with the implication that it therefore [[black-swan fallacy|cannot be true at all]]

Revision as of 23:14, August 26, 2016

Deliberate ignorance is the practice of refusing to consider or discuss logic or evidence disproving ideologically motivated positions. Related concepts are wishful thinking and the fallacy of invincible ignorance. Examples of deliberate ignorance include:

Common expressions of deliberate ignorance include:

  • "I find that hard to believe!" (Howard Dean, June 11, 2008, in response to a fact ignored by liberals[2])
  • "I'm not aware of that!" (without admitting a failure to look)
  • "I've never seen that in the New York Times!"
  • "That's not what it said in my (public school) textbook!"
  • "Let's talk about something else!"
  • "I'm not interested in that!"
  • "That offends me!" (used as an excuse not to consider facts or logic)
  • "You're persecuting me!" (when the "persecution" consists only of pointing out inconvenient facts or logic)
  • "That's not true in my experience," with the implication that it therefore cannot be true at all

Deliberate ignorance is clearly quoted from the Bible in 2 Peter 3:3-6: "Above all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. They will say, “Where is this ‘coming’ he promised? Ever since our ancestors died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation.” But they deliberately forget that long ago by God’s word the heavens came into being and the earth was formed out of water and by water. By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed." (NIV) This is only referring to the denial of God's magnificent handiwork in the creation.

Crime of Deliberate Ignorance

Deliberate ignorance can be a crime. For example, jurors were instructed "to consider whether ... former Enron Corp. executives deliberately ignored accounting fraud as the energy trader fell into bankruptcy."[3]

References