ABSTRACT

I argue that there is a prima facie tension between solutions to the problem of fake news and solutions to the problem presented by various cognitive biases that dispose us to dismiss evidence against our prior beliefs (what might seem to be the driving force behind echo chambers). We can guard against fake news by strengthening belief. But we can exit echo chambers by becoming more sensitive to counterevidence, which seems to require weakening our beliefs. I resolve the tension by arguing against an injunction to weaken belief in the required ways. In particular, there is no injunction to be open-minded in all circumstances toward various counterarguments, even those whose premises seem compelling and in which we can’t expose a flaw. On the contrary, there are circumstances in which you should, in the relevant sense, be closed-minded toward such counterarguments.

摘要

我认为，假新闻问题的解决方案与各种认知偏见提出的问题的解决方案之间存在明显的紧张关系，这些偏见使我们忽视了反对我们先前信念的证据（这似乎是回声室背后的驱动力） . 我们可以通过坚定信念来防范假新闻。但是我们可以通过对反证变得更加敏感来退出回声室，这似乎需要削弱我们的信念。我通过反对以所需方式削弱信念的禁令来解决紧张局势。特别是，没有禁令要求在所有情况下都对各种反驳持开放态度，即使是那些前提似乎令人信服且我们无法揭露缺陷的反驳。相反，在某些情况下，您应该，在相关意义上，