Difference between revisions of "Deliberate ignorance"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(related concept)
m (link is not substantive enough to be included)
Line 6: Line 6:
 
* [[Democrats]] refusing to acknowledge [[Barack Obama]]'s appeal to unpatriotic donors and supporters
 
* [[Democrats]] refusing to acknowledge [[Barack Obama]]'s appeal to unpatriotic donors and supporters
 
* [[materialists]] refuse to address the impossibility of material explanation for [[migration]] and [[homing]]
 
* [[materialists]] refuse to address the impossibility of material explanation for [[migration]] and [[homing]]
* [[evolutionists]] refuse to address the lack of a plausible evolutionary path for the [[whale]]<ref>This is disputed by evolutionists at a blog worth reviewing further for plausibility [http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/02/two_tales_of_whale_evolution.php here].</ref> and the other [[counterexamples to evolution]].
+
* [[evolutionists]] refuse to address the lack of a plausible evolutionary path for the [[whale]] and the other [[counterexamples to evolution]]
 
* [[liberals]] refuse to address how [[socialism]] destroys productivity
 
* [[liberals]] refuse to address how [[socialism]] destroys productivity
 
* Advocates of the [[global warming theory]] refuse to consider any scientific evidence which shows that natural causes have always had a greater effect on terrestrial air temperature than human activity.
 
* Advocates of the [[global warming theory]] refuse to consider any scientific evidence which shows that natural causes have always had a greater effect on terrestrial air temperature than human activity.

Revision as of 00:10, 4 March 2011

Deliberate ignorance is the practice of refusing to consider or discuss logic or evidence disproving ideologically motivated positions. A related concept is the fallacy of invincible ignorance. Examples of deliberate ignorance include:

(add more)

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!"
  • "They hate us for our freedom!"
  • "Complete suspension of disbelief!"
  • "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)

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