Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The "Illusion of Truth" Effect

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU
 
greyl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 01:01 AM
Original message
The "Illusion of Truth" Effect
Nourishment for cogitation from the always-great Cracked:

<snip

Nobody likes to think of themselves as susceptible to advertisements, or propaganda, or liars. Too bad. It's just part of the mechanical workings of our brain: when we hear a statement enough, we'll start to believe it.

They call it the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implicit_memory#Illusion-of-truth_effect">"Illusion of Truth" effect. We judge things to be true based on how often we hear them. We like familiarity, and repeating a lie often enough makes it familiar to us, the repetition making it fall right in with all of the things our memory tells us are true about the world. Every advertiser or propagandist knows this. Humans are social animals, and there is a primal part of us that still says, "If other members of the tribe who I feel close to believe this, there must be something to it."

And no, simply showing us the correct information doesn't fix it. Quite the opposite: research shows that once we've seized on an incorrect piece of information, exposure to the facts either doesn't change what we think, or makes us even more likely to hold onto the false information. You can guess why this is: our self-image triumphs over all. It's more important that we continue to think of ourselves as infallible than admit we're wrong. This is how people continue to believe admitted hoaxes after they have been proven to be fake.

But wait, here's the best part:
continue

Refresh | 0 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 01:17 AM
Response to Original message
1. Excellent!
Now, if we can just get the "truthers" to read it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
BeFree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 09:27 AM
Response to Original message
2. Yep
Bushco said it was them guys, the media reported it as such, too many people believed it and here we are.

It has taken a long time to get some of the truth out, but thanks to DU and the internet, the truth is overcoming the bushco "Illusion of Truth".
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 09:45 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. Do you really claim we weren't attacked by al Qaeda on...
Edited on Tue Aug-31-10 09:46 AM by SDuderstadt
9/11? You keep trying to confuse this issue by backhandedly smearing those who disagree with you on the facts as somehow dupes of Bushco.

Have you ever read "Against all Enemies" by Richard Clarke? Do you think Bob Graham believes 9/11 was an "inside job"? How much longer are you going to continue to embarrass DU and the Democratic Party with your goofy bullshit?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
BeFree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 10:06 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. Ok
You seem to have ALL the answers and know everything, here are two questions.

What is an Al-Queda?

And what was redacted from Bob Graham's senate report?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 10:07 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Dude...
you answer my questions first.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
BeFree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 10:11 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. Hahaha
You have no answers. Talk about embarrassing?

Grow up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
deconstruct911 Donating Member (809 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 10:24 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. no
Edited on Tue Aug-31-10 10:25 AM by deconstruct911
Sdude has all the answers

& I might add posts the most productive threads. They just make every DU user stand up in pride.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
BeFree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 10:34 AM
Response to Reply #8
10. yep
I have too remember that, eh?

Don't question the Mr. Dude. It might prove embarrassing for the dude. Might hell, it does. We need to be nice, right? And quit making it embarrass itself?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 10:40 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. Dude...
Edited on Tue Aug-31-10 10:41 AM by SDuderstadt
we've had two national conventions since 9/11. I don't recall either of them making the case that "9/11 was an inside job". You might want to start with the DNC and see how far you get with your goofy bullshit. You also might want to go back and read Sen. Kerry's address to the convention, then ask him why he believes al Qaeda attacked us on 9/11. Let us know how that goes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
whatchamacallit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 10:59 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. "we've had two national conventions since 9/11..."
Edited on Tue Aug-31-10 10:59 AM by whatchamacallit
Which means jack shit. Using Sdude's silly logic, the fact that global warming wasn't the centerpiece of the conventions would indicate no one believes it exists. Sdude's critical thinking classes = fail.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 11:05 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. "the fact that global warming wasn't the centerpiece of the conventions would indicate no one...
believes it exists"

Another one of your stupid strawman arguments. I never said that anything had to be the centerpiece, dude. But, I am willing to bet that global warming was addressed at both conventions without even looking to see. I don't recall any portion of either convention being devoted to goofy "9/11 was an inside job" bullshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
whatchamacallit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 11:20 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. So, in a political and social environment so obviously hostile
to the notion of 9/11 being an inside job, you would nonetheless expect politicians (of all people) to freely express their views on the possibility of government complicity? Only in Sdude's Simpletonland...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 11:25 AM
Response to Reply #14
16. Oh, I see...
so they secretly believe "9/11 was an inside job" but won't express it openly?

Pardon me for a moment while I laugh my ass off, dude.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
whatchamacallit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 11:40 AM
Response to Reply #16
17. Laugh all you like
The idea that everyone would gladly open themselves to professional and public ridicule, especially when running for office, is one of your goofiest fallacies. And I thought only republicans couldn't see grey...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 11:44 AM
Response to Reply #17
19. Argumentum ad ignorantium...
Edited on Tue Aug-31-10 11:48 AM by SDuderstadt
you're trying to argue that the lack of politicians embracing goofy "9/11 was an inside job" bullshit actually shows they believe it.

I haven't encountered anything this goofy since Clinton's impeachment when RWers claimed that the lack of evidence against Clinton just proved "how sneaky he is".
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
whatchamacallit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 11:48 AM
Response to Reply #19
21. Bullshit
I claim no such thing. I have no idea what people believe. You on the other hand, committed the very fallacy you accuse me of with your stupid "how come nobody ran on inside job at the conventions" bullshit. You are one mixed up dude, dude.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 11:51 AM
Response to Reply #21
22. I asked a simple question, dude...
why isn't the Democratic Party buying your goofy "9/11 was an inside job" bullshit. I'm not merely saying they are merely avoiding the subject. I am pointing out that they are directly adopting a position 180 degrees from yours. I don't see a lot if ambiguity there, do you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
whatchamacallit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 11:53 AM
Response to Reply #22
24. Argumentum ad ignorantium
Pot meet kettle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 12:23 PM
Response to Reply #24
25. Bullshit, dude...
the Democratic Party has adopted an explicit position. You'll have to show that they really didn't mean it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
whatchamacallit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 01:09 PM
Response to Reply #25
27. Says you. If you can show me where in the democratic platform
it specifically states the party's official position regarding the facts of 9/11, you've got something. Otherwise, you're full of crap. And don't demand I spend my time disproving something you pulled out of your ass. You made the statement about an explicit position, so prove it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #27
28. Gladly, dude...
from the 2008 Democratic Party platform:

Defeating Al Qaeda and Combating Terrorism
· Win in Afghanistan
· Seek a New Partnership with Pakistan
· Combat Terrorism
· Secure the Homeland
· Pursue Intelligence Reform

Defeating Al Qaeda and Combating Terrorism
The central front in the war on terror is not Iraq, and it never was. We will defeat Al Qaeda in
Afghanistan and Pakistan, where those who actually attacked us on 9-11 reside and are
resurgent.


Win in Afghanistan
Our troops are performing heroically in Afghanistan, but as countless military commanders and
the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff acknowledge, we lack the resources to finish the job
because of our commitment to Iraq. We will finally make the fight against Al Qaeda and the
Taliban the top priority that it should be.
We will send at least two additional combat brigades to Afghanistan, and use this commitment
to seek greater contributions–with fewer restrictions–from our NATO allies. We will focus on
building up our special forces and intelligence capacity, training, equipping and advising Afghan
security forces, building Afghan governmental capacity, and promoting the rule of law. We will
bolster our State Department’s Provincial Reconstruction Teams and our other government
agencies helping the Afghan people. We will help Afghans educate their children, including their
girls, provide basic human services to their population, and grow their economy from the bottom
up, with an additional $1 billion in non-military assistance each year–including investments in
alternative livelihoods to poppy-growing for Afghan farmers–just as we crack down on
trafficking and corruption. Afghanistan must not be lost to a future of narco-terrorism–or
become again a haven for terrorists.

Seek a New Partnership with Pakistan

The greatest threat to the security of the Afghan people–and the American people–lies in the
tribal regions of Pakistan, where terrorists train, plot attacks, and strike into Afghanistan and
move back across the border. We cannot tolerate a sanctuary for Al Qaeda. We need a
stronger and sustained partnership between Afghanistan, Pakistan, and NATO–including
necessary assets like satellites and predator drones–to better secure the border, to take out
terrorist camps, and to crack down on cross-border insurgents. We must help Pakistan develop
its own counter-terrorism and counter-insurgency capacity. We will invest in the long-term
development of the Pashtun border region, so that the extremists’ program of hate is met with
an agenda of hope.

We will ask more of the Pakistani government, rather than offer a blank check to an
undemocratic President. We will significantly increase non-military aid to the Pakistani people
and sustain it for a decade, while ensuring that the military assistance we provide is actually used
to fight extremists. We must move beyond an alliance built on individual leaders, or we will face
mounting opposition in a nuclear-armed nation at the nexus of terror, extremism, and the
instability wrought by autocracy.

Combat Terrorism

Beyond Afghanistan and Pakistan, we must forge a more effective global response to terrorism.
There must be no safe haven for those who plot to kill Americans. We need a comprehensive
strategy to defeat global terrorists–one that draws on the full range of American power,
including but not limited to our military might. We will create a properly resourced Shared
Security Partnership to enhance counter-terrorism cooperation with countries around the world,
including through information sharing as well as funding for training, operations, border security,
anti-corruption programs, technology, and targeting terrorist financing.


We will pursue policies to undermine extremism, recognizing that this contest is also between
two competing ideas and visions of the future. A crucial debate is occurring within Islam. The
vast majority of Muslims believe in a future of peace, tolerance, development, and
democratization. A small minority embrace a rigid and violent intolerance of personal liberty and
the world at large. To empower forces of moderation, America must live up to our values,
respect civil liberties, reject torture, and lead by example. We will make every effort to export
hope and opportunity–access to education, that opens minds to tolerance, not extremism;
secure food and water supplies; and health care, trade, capital, and investment. We will
provide steady support for political reformers, democratic institutions, and civil society that is
necessary to uphold human rights and build respect for the rule of law.

Secure the Homeland

Here at home, we will strengthen our security and protect the critical infrastructure on which the
entire world depends. We will fully fund and implement the recommendations of the bipartisan
9-11 Commission. We will spend homeland security dollars on the basis of risk. This means
investing more resources to defend mass transit, closing the gaps in our aviation security by
screening all cargo on passenger airliners and checking all passengers against a reliable and
comprehensive watch list, and upgrading plant security and port security by ensuring that cargo
is screened for radiation. To ensure that resources are targeted, we will establish a Quadrennial
Review at the Department of Homeland Security to undertake a top to bottom assessment of
the threats we face and our ability to confront them. And we will develop a comprehensive
National Infrastructure Protection Plan that draws on both local know-how and national
priorities. We will ensure direct coordination with state, local, and tribal jurisdictions so that first
responders are always resourced and prepared.

Pursue Intelligence Reform

To succeed, our homeland security and counter-terrorism actions must be linked to an
intelligence community that deals effectively with the threats we face. Today, we rely largely on
the same institutions and practices that were in place before 9-11. Barack Obama will
depoliticize intelligence by appointing a Director of National Intelligence with a fixed term,
create a bipartisan Consultative Group of congressional leaders on national security, and
establish a National Declassification Center to ensure openness. To keep pace with highly
adaptable enemies, we need technologies and practices that enable us to efficiently collect and
share information within and across our intelligence agencies. We must invest still more in human
intelligence and deploy additional trained operatives with specialized knowledge of local cultures
and languages. And we will institutionalize the practice of developing competitive assessments of
critical threats and strengthen our methodologies of analysis.


http://s3.amazonaws.com/apache.3cdn.net/8a738445026d1d5f0f_bcm6b5l7a.pdf


Is that explicit enough for you, dude? Please feel free to flail away. It's comical to watch.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
whatchamacallit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 01:36 PM
Response to Reply #28
29. Cool
You're correct about this. Thanks for providing it. That said, you're still committing a logical fallacy in assuming that anyone who does not publicly challenge the party platform, believes the party position to be true. You simply cannot make a valid logical expression there, and if you studied as you claim, you'd know it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 01:42 PM
Response to Reply #29
30. Show me where I ever said that, dude....
That said, you're still committing a logical fallacy in assuming that anyone who does not publicly challenge the party platform, believes the party position to be true.


Yet one more of your stupid strawman arguments.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-02-10 02:23 AM
Response to Reply #14
40. Okay...
if you guys are so right, why is the "political and social environment so obviously hostile"?

Here's a guess: Because "9/11 was an inside job" is goofy bullshit, dude.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #12
15. Dude...
here are links to both the 2004 and 2008 Democratic Party Platforms.

You'll note that defeating terrorism and addressing climate change are prominent features of both. Funny, there is no mention that "9/11 was an inside job". Maybe you should call Tim Kaine and straighten him out. Need the number?



http://www.democrats.org/pdfs/2004platform.pdf

http://www.c-span.org/pdf/draft-2008-democratic-national-platform.pdf

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
whatchamacallit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 11:43 AM
Response to Reply #15
18. Alright
So you're saying that in our political climate, if you were an atheist running for office, you'd bring that to the fore? My turn to laugh.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 11:45 AM
Response to Reply #18
20. No, dude...
another one of your stupid strawman arguments.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
whatchamacallit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 11:52 AM
Response to Reply #20
23. Not stupid at all
Stupid is attempting to deduce what politicians (or people in general) believe from what they do or don't publicly promote. That's pretty stupid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 12:25 PM
Response to Reply #23
26. Dude...
if there was that kind of ambiguity, why even address it in the platform? Do you understand how the platform gets written?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 10:33 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. Dude...
I am not going to play games with you. You want answers to your questions, you have to provide answers to questions you are asked first. Deal? Or, are you going to fold like you usually do?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-01-10 08:47 AM
Response to Reply #9
39. As usual, you fold...
what a hoot, dude.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
deconstruct911 Donating Member (809 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 10:09 AM
Response to Reply #3
6. How many CIA sacked for this? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
LARED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-01-10 05:50 AM
Response to Reply #3
37. Notice how it is nearly impossible to get a straight answer to a
simple question.

It like they know claiming Al Qaeda was not the attackers makes them look like fools, but they really believe it, so to avoid looking foolish they change the subject.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-01-10 08:09 AM
Response to Reply #37
38. Precisely...
then they can't figure out why no one takes them seriously. The most amazing thing is how few of them are left, yet they pretend they comprise a sizable group.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
greyl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 11:36 PM
Response to Reply #2
32. Looks like you either didn't read "the best part", or didn't comprehend it.
Additionally, it appears you don't agree that a necessary condition for something to be true is that it has actual supporting evidence. That disqualifies you from having a productive role in serious discussions or investigations about historical events.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
MinM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 02:18 PM
Response to Original message
31. 5 Myths That People Don't Realize Are Admitted Hoaxes???
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 11:41 PM
Response to Reply #31
33. Ummm....
how in the world is that a "strawman"?

Do you even know what a strawman is?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
greyl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-31-10 11:55 PM
Response to Reply #31
34. That's not a straw argument.
That's a collection of examples that illustrate how humans can clutch their ideas even in the face of absolutely clear-cut evidence that their ideas are false.
Kind of like how some people 'forget' that Korey Rowe and Dylan Avery admitted to spreading lies to the benefit of "9/11 Truth". And some people still buy that shit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
IScreamSundays Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-01-10 02:37 AM
Response to Original message
35. By Golly!!
You have gone ahead and described the OCTers to a tee. Defend, rinse, repeat. Damn and with a link and everything.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Sep-01-10 02:46 AM
Response to Reply #35
36. This is unintentional irony...
right?

Could you please defend your allegation?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Dec 22nd 2024, 09:21 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC