The Reverse-Negative Feedback Loop

The Reverse-Negative Feedback Loop

Sometimes I think it’s fair to say that some positions are really hard to defend, even ones that are based on opinions. For example many people believe that homosexuality is immoral. I would say that this is a hard position to defend without appealing to religion or other dogmatic beliefs. Lots of people have attempted to defend this view with statistics, anecdotes and other assertions, but most of these defenses don’t hold up to even a small amount of scrutiny. And after a while, one may quite reasonably assume that there are no good defenses of  this argument after hearing so many bad ones.

Normally when we talk about feedback loops in terms of social behavior, we mean in terms of self-fulfilling prophecies. If an idea is propagated to a sufficient degree, it could happen that the idea could come true as a result of itself being proposed. A hypothetical example of this is if a bunch of people invest in a business and then are led to believe that business is failing, they might all start pulling their investments out, which could then cause the business to actually fail. However when it comes to discussions and debates, we see sort of a reverse reaction to feedback. Negative ideas and criticisms provided to a certain degree often has the effect of emboldening the very argument they are condemning.

As I implied above, this could be argued as reasonable. If you’ve never heard a decent argument against an idea you have, or if you’ve heard very few, are you not justified in thinking your argument is a good one? Perhaps. The problem arises when we are in a space where bad arguments are the norm.

I’ve talked a lot about the state of discourse today, particularly on the internet, and how it leaves much to be desired. And I noticed recently that this sort of anti-feedback loop can be problematic for people like me who are interested in forming and evolving good arguments. Fallacious, emotional, and mean-spirited arguments seem to be the norm right now, and its easy to find myself more assured of myself after being bombarded with these terrible notions. Like the homosexuality example, surely if there are few if any good arguments against my position, perhaps my position is quite solid? I’m really not so sure–it could just be that the good arguments are being drowned out by all the nonsense.

Support me on Patreon!
Share this!Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterShare on TumblrShare on RedditShare on Google+Pin on Pinterest

One Response

  1. Gabe says:

    As far as homosexuality goes, I went to Catholic school and was surrounded by serious, intellectual, reasonable who provided me with the most defensible arguments against homosexuality, and even then I’ve come to disagree with them. So on that issue I’m pretty sure your position is correct. However I definitely agree in principle with you and I think a lot of people who reject certain arguments on the claim that they’re totally emotional make similarly emotional arguments for their other opinions. At that point its basically just sports. You just pick a group and follow the correct set of opinions, and that turns it into pretty much just a baseless fictional rivalry that doesn’t go a long way toward helping anyone or anything.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *