Skip to main content

Fake It Till You Make It: The Method of Half-Wits with Likeminded Followers


The information technology era has combined with a generation armed with fancy words and concepts they don’t completely understand to equip a great many with smart-sounding statements, which ultimately fail the more rigorous test of logic, and a wide audience to receive and celebrate their every utterance. 

So while increasing numbers enjoy the wide-reaching channels of media once employed exclusively by professionals, they exist no differently than the trick-or-treaters on Halloween who do their best to look the part.

 
One key distinction here is that the former may make a more compelling case by glossing over complex concepts with smart-sounding words or pseudo-scientific explanation, without anyone in the audience noticing the difference. 

And while the trick-or-treaters eventually return to their regular attire and reveal their true colors, the con artist continues his charade until he returns home for the night, where he’s either miraculously convinced himself that he actually knows what he’s talking about or, otherwise, where he humbly yet privately acknowledges that he’s dishonestly represented himself. 

Any public announcement of this acknowledgment, however, remains a long shot, as he simply stands to lose too much by that level of honesty — especially as so many have placed such great measures of faith in his pronouncements. 

So, instead, he continues the act into perpetuity, until he’s climbed the proverbial ranks to eminent social or professional approval, he’s reached an impasse where he can no longer justify the con, or he’s been too thoroughly exposed as a fraud to carry on. 

In the latter two cases, there is surely always another aspiring con artist to fill the void, seamlessly filling in for yesterday’s act as if he hadn’t even existed. 

And so without a hitch in the step of socially-fashionable discourse, the inertia beats ceaselessly against the less presentable and more honest outcasts who take sincere interest in seeking the sharpest semblance of the truth, who will not tolerate anything short of cogent and logical explanation, and who will not begin to sell their under-baked goods to the public until they’ve reached completion. 

The same certainly cannot be said about their dishonest run-of-the-mill opponents, who merely pray that their customers don’t notice the difference and, half-heartedly, that they don’t get sick in the process. 

All too often, as it so often appears, disastrous outcomes are uninterested in intentions, nor are they mitigated by them, and the fact that the so-called experts deem them unforeseen or unforeseeable serves only to certify that they were indeed unqualified to testify on the subject in the first place. 

Yet, as is the case with anything measured by bare consensus, this phenomenon will endure so long as unexamined emotional appeals triumph over disciplined discourse and incisive investigation. 

The latter today appears too tall an order for the politically-manipulated, intellectually-disinterested public to stomach, as the uncomfortable jolt would necessitate a reconsideration of all that they’ve learned and all that they’ve believed to be true — or rather, not what they’ve believed, but what they believe they’ve known to be true. 

And this plainly amounts to far too much work for adults who’ve already grown into their principles, who’ve placed their immovable stamps of approval on them, and who’ve got no interest in looking back. 

After all, why would they? 

They needn’t do much more than scan their news feeds or tune in to YouTube to find the next viral philosophical dance which is often more than enough to entrance the unwitting observer, which is so often more than adequate to fake it till you make it.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

America's Civil War: Not "Civil" and Not About Slavery

Virtually the entirety of South and Central America, as well as European powers Britain, Spain and France, peacefully abolished slavery — without war — in the first sixty years of the nineteenth century.  Why, then, did the United States enter into a bloody war that cost over half of the nation’s wealth, at least 800,000 lives and many hundreds of thousands more in casualties?  The answer: the War Between the States was not about slavery.  It was a war of invasion to further empower the central government and to reject state sovereignty, nullification of unconstitutional laws, and the states’ rights to secession.  It was a war that would cripple the South and witness the federal debt skyrocket from $65 million in 1860 to $2.7 billion in 1865, whose annual interest alone would prove twice as expensive as the entire federal budget from 1860. Likewise, it was a war that would witness a five-fold increase in the number of civilians employed by the federal government, as federal gove

Cullen Roche's Not So "Pragmatic Capitalism"

In his riveting new work Pragmatic Capitalism , Cullen Roche, founder of Orcam Financial Group, a San Diego-based financial firm, sets out to correct the mainstream schools of economic thought, focusing on  Keynesians, Monetarists, and Austrians alike. This new macroeconomic perspective claims to reveal What Every Investor Needs to Know About Money and Finance . Indeed, Roche introduces the layman to various elementary principles of economics and financial markets, revealing in early chapters the failed state of the average hedge fund and mutual fund operators -- who are better car salesmen than financial pundits, Roche writes --  who have fallen victim to the group think phenomenon, spawning the nearly perfect positive correlation to the major indexes, and thus, accounting for tax, inflation, and service adjustments, holistically wiping out any value added by their supposed market insight.  Roche also references popular studies, such as the MckInsey Global Institute's report whi

The Evils of Facebook in the War Against Reason

Facebook is one of the greatest frauds whereby thoughtless friends share or tacitly embrace ideas which, in doing so, adds personal, relatable flair to messages being distributed from largely unknown reporters.  In effect, these friends then subject a wider community to the thought that since their friends are supportive of such ideas, then they ought to carry some merit or authenticity.  Facebook commits a great disservice to communication, serving primarily to subject meaningful dialogue to inherently-binary measures of laudability or contemptibility.  Whereas scientific evaluation serves to extract emotion, Facebook serves to embolden the fallacy-ridden supposition that fact follows fanfare, that truth trails trendiness, and that democratic participation (by way of “likes” or “shares”) can reliably support truth or sustainably produce virtue. What's more, Facebook and other social media sites tend also to further the fallacy that the last breath, or more precisely the f