Opinion: How to pull your family members out of the information rabbit hole(statepress.com)
statepress.com
Opinion: How to pull your family members out of the information rabbit hole
https://www.statepress.com/article/2025/05/opinion-misinformation-rabbit-hole-saving#
8 comments
> Don't fall into the trap of letting news or politics be the drivers of your life unless something has directly affected you.
Being a woman, child, or less than independently wealthy means politics will affect you
Being a woman, child, or less than independently wealthy means politics will affect you
Sure, but it doesn’t mean it also must be the primary driver of your life or be brought into all things. “Everything is political” has to be one of the worst ideas to infect modern culture. Not because politics doesn’t touch everything on some level, or because everything can’t be political, but because if everything is always treated as a political act, then it is impossible to find shared humanity with people who don’t share your politics. And that inability to find shared humanity with your fellow human beings is what drives hatred and division at scale. If everything is political then the very act of hiring someone is political, and if the very act of hiring someone is political then all of us non-independently wealthy schmucks now not only have to contend with a job market in general, but also with whether our prospective employers think it is the correct politics to hire us. I’d really rather not live in a world where my employer has to decide if hiring me aligns with their personal politics.
Also because politics is identity for a lot of people, it also ties things together unnecessarily. Maybe your boss is a generally conservative type, and big on classic business practices. But maybe he's also not immediately closed to an idea if someone presents it with some merit. When "Return to Office" vs "Work from Home" becomes a political battle instead of a business decision, now it's a lot harder to have the discussion on merits, because the baggage of political identity has been tied to the issue too, and maybe now your boss feels pressure to make a political statement by ordering RTO. And you can say "well then your boss isn't smart" or "your boss wasn't willing to listen to an issue on merit" and those both might be true (or might not), but that doesn't change the fact that tying the issue to politics means a whole bunch of people who might have not had to deal with an RTO mandate now do.
Also because politics is identity for a lot of people, it also ties things together unnecessarily. Maybe your boss is a generally conservative type, and big on classic business practices. But maybe he's also not immediately closed to an idea if someone presents it with some merit. When "Return to Office" vs "Work from Home" becomes a political battle instead of a business decision, now it's a lot harder to have the discussion on merits, because the baggage of political identity has been tied to the issue too, and maybe now your boss feels pressure to make a political statement by ordering RTO. And you can say "well then your boss isn't smart" or "your boss wasn't willing to listen to an issue on merit" and those both might be true (or might not), but that doesn't change the fact that tying the issue to politics means a whole bunch of people who might have not had to deal with an RTO mandate now do.
>Being a woman, child, or less than independently wealthy means politics will affect you
I never realized having a penis means you are immune and untouchable by politics. My entire life has been a lie i could have just ignored laws, inflation and wars. Thanks for the enlightenment!
I never realized having a penis means you are immune and untouchable by politics. My entire life has been a lie i could have just ignored laws, inflation and wars. Thanks for the enlightenment!
I took this strategy originally. Now my family has outright deranged takes on all kinds of scenarios, and it bleeds out in all interactions with them. This isn't news or politics. It is our lives. It's more than some silly disagreement on how to run the world.
Objectively flawed thinking needs to be nipped in the bud, because without resistance from people in real life, social media has free reign to strengthen it. Everybody has a firehose of propaganda they can consume any time of day.
I’ve watched a lot of street interviews in Russia, especially about the war. It’s incredible how many of the interviewees, in the face of harsh facts, resort to logical fallacies and pejoratives. “We didn’t do that, and if we did they deserved it.” That kind of thing. This thinking can proliferate in a country without freedom of speech and where propaganda has an absolute grip.
>Objectively flawed thinking needs to be nipped in the bud
I'm looking at this sentence in the light of my current struggles dealing with the irrationalities of so many things. I've spent enough lifespan pointing out the simplest logical falacies to no avail. Heck I lost my last job because I wouldn't shut up about my stupid desire for any sql isolation mode other than "read uncommitted" from our developers.
Sure, objectively flawed thinking doesn't seem to be that desireable, but its popular, people like what we would think is "objectively flawed thinking" or worse yet, can be talked into it by their local snake handling baptist preachers. I tried a few times talking politics for instance with friends and family but I can only quote facts from the best sources I can muster. What good is that if all my best sources of information isn't from you know who, or more importantly, when these folks believe you know who's assertion about what is "fake news"? The worst are the baptists, because they can believe practically any nonsense from their preacher because what baptist preacher is considered faulty by their own congregation?
I do applaud folks who still have hope, but its a condescending sort of applause, you know the old southern "bless your heart" or whatever your regional equivalent is.
I'm looking at this sentence in the light of my current struggles dealing with the irrationalities of so many things. I've spent enough lifespan pointing out the simplest logical falacies to no avail. Heck I lost my last job because I wouldn't shut up about my stupid desire for any sql isolation mode other than "read uncommitted" from our developers.
Sure, objectively flawed thinking doesn't seem to be that desireable, but its popular, people like what we would think is "objectively flawed thinking" or worse yet, can be talked into it by their local snake handling baptist preachers. I tried a few times talking politics for instance with friends and family but I can only quote facts from the best sources I can muster. What good is that if all my best sources of information isn't from you know who, or more importantly, when these folks believe you know who's assertion about what is "fake news"? The worst are the baptists, because they can believe practically any nonsense from their preacher because what baptist preacher is considered faulty by their own congregation?
I do applaud folks who still have hope, but its a condescending sort of applause, you know the old southern "bless your heart" or whatever your regional equivalent is.
I can completely empathise with that. I think a hard lesson I’ve had to learn at some point is that people just don’t want to debate or have hard conversations because it exerts mental effort. Most don’t have a drive to discover the “truth” or arrive at the most optimal solution. This makes you the enemy when you try to engage them, even if it’s not something they’re particularly invested in. In addition many people have an immature mentality where changing their position and adopting yours is losing. They see it as a battleground.
That's not how we communicate in person. Humans sit together in groups, constantly judging one another. Constantly being judged and adjusting our thoughts on life. Other people are our safety net where we can get corrected about stupid or outright harmful ideas. Saying it's not your job to convince people of things is the antithesis to being a human.
Depends, if a member of your family have a slightly different take on fiskal autonomy you might just ignore it.
If a member of your family turned into a radicalized neo-nazi not talking about it is like abandonding them, just like it would be if they got a clinical depression. Certain kinds of ideology are incompatible with peaceful family life and papering over it will make it worse. If you're a well read intellectual, remember that this ideology ultimately would put you into the gas chambers if you said the wrong thing. A family member can have a different political view, but if that view threatens your very existence that is the limit.
Now if all you family is neo-nazis and you are the odd one out I suggest to just get out.
(I use the wikipedia-first paragraph defintion of neo-nazism here, and I have personal experience with people following that ideology, before anybody claims I mean any fictional strawman variant of it. If you find your own ideology within the definition of the Neo-Nazism article on Wikipedia, that says something about your ideology, not about mine)
If a member of your family turned into a radicalized neo-nazi not talking about it is like abandonding them, just like it would be if they got a clinical depression. Certain kinds of ideology are incompatible with peaceful family life and papering over it will make it worse. If you're a well read intellectual, remember that this ideology ultimately would put you into the gas chambers if you said the wrong thing. A family member can have a different political view, but if that view threatens your very existence that is the limit.
Now if all you family is neo-nazis and you are the odd one out I suggest to just get out.
(I use the wikipedia-first paragraph defintion of neo-nazism here, and I have personal experience with people following that ideology, before anybody claims I mean any fictional strawman variant of it. If you find your own ideology within the definition of the Neo-Nazism article on Wikipedia, that says something about your ideology, not about mine)
> If a member of your family turned into a radicalized neo-nazi not talking about it is like abandonding them, just like it would be if they got a clinical depression.
I think it would be hard to find an adult with clinical depression who would choose to have clinical depression if it was a choice.
Believing that socio-political and economic theories like neo-nazism are superior is an opinion. It's hard to find folks without opinions.
* If someone is talking neo-nazism all the time and that's not interesting to you, then don't talk to them about it.
* If anyone is breaking the law to support some political cause... stay away.
What matters is what people do.
It seems people are looking constantly for reasons to dislike others. Looking for common ground may be a better way to connect.
I think it would be hard to find an adult with clinical depression who would choose to have clinical depression if it was a choice.
Believing that socio-political and economic theories like neo-nazism are superior is an opinion. It's hard to find folks without opinions.
* If someone is talking neo-nazism all the time and that's not interesting to you, then don't talk to them about it.
* If anyone is breaking the law to support some political cause... stay away.
What matters is what people do.
It seems people are looking constantly for reasons to dislike others. Looking for common ground may be a better way to connect.
I'm trans, so unfortunately politics does directly affect me. Ask your family to do some reading about each party's platforms, and then vote left
The border for regular political discourse should be political movements that deny other peoples right to exist, based on natural attributes they dislike.
In the old times people would have been shunned (or beaten for being left-handed (in certain areas of the world) for example, a trait you're just simply born with. They tried to re-educate lefties so they use the right hand instead which lead to a whole host of psychological effects summarized in left-handedness suppression syndrome.
Then science came and whatever dumb superstitions people connected to left-handedness were seen in a different light and the superstition died out.
The problematic thing about today's anti-trans movement is that it is paired with such a distrust for science that they ignore every scientific evidence that would tell them that punishing someone for being trans is just as wrong as punishing someone for being left-handed. Just like there is a natural fraction of left-handed people in a population (which seemed to "rise" and then settled at its natural value right after society no longer punished it), there is a natural fraction of trans persons, gays, lesbians, bi- and asexuals, etc.
For me the Karl Popper's paradoxon of intolerance is a good guide. There is no need for members of a free society to extend tolerance towards the intolerant. In fact I think if we want to keep a free society we have a duty to fight back against intolerance in various ways.
In the old times people would have been shunned (or beaten for being left-handed (in certain areas of the world) for example, a trait you're just simply born with. They tried to re-educate lefties so they use the right hand instead which lead to a whole host of psychological effects summarized in left-handedness suppression syndrome.
Then science came and whatever dumb superstitions people connected to left-handedness were seen in a different light and the superstition died out.
The problematic thing about today's anti-trans movement is that it is paired with such a distrust for science that they ignore every scientific evidence that would tell them that punishing someone for being trans is just as wrong as punishing someone for being left-handed. Just like there is a natural fraction of left-handed people in a population (which seemed to "rise" and then settled at its natural value right after society no longer punished it), there is a natural fraction of trans persons, gays, lesbians, bi- and asexuals, etc.
For me the Karl Popper's paradoxon of intolerance is a good guide. There is no need for members of a free society to extend tolerance towards the intolerant. In fact I think if we want to keep a free society we have a duty to fight back against intolerance in various ways.
I get that only talking politics can be exhausting, but I think not talking about politics is the trap. If a hurricane can destroy my life, I should prepare for that before it impacts me: pay for home insurance, buy a generator, weatherproof my home, talk to neighbors.
I should prepare for politics that can destroy my life before it impacts me, and preparing for it means talking to other people about it.
If people don't vaccinate, and my baby gets measles before I can vaccinate her, she could die. If I have a complicated pregnancy, I could be forced to wait it out and get sepsis and die. If my friends get deported, they lose their jobs, homes, cars and I lose my connection to them. If I have to pay more for goods because of tariffs that is less money I can spend on my family.
If I wait until my baby has measles, I have sepsis, or my friends get deported to talk about these issues and convince others, then I haven't adequately prepared for politics that can destroy my life.
I should prepare for politics that can destroy my life before it impacts me, and preparing for it means talking to other people about it.
If people don't vaccinate, and my baby gets measles before I can vaccinate her, she could die. If I have a complicated pregnancy, I could be forced to wait it out and get sepsis and die. If my friends get deported, they lose their jobs, homes, cars and I lose my connection to them. If I have to pay more for goods because of tariffs that is less money I can spend on my family.
If I wait until my baby has measles, I have sepsis, or my friends get deported to talk about these issues and convince others, then I haven't adequately prepared for politics that can destroy my life.
Well said. I like the hurricane analogy. It's naive to think that it can be ignored. It will come around and affect you, and at that point, it might be too late.
> I should prepare for politics that can destroy my life before it impacts me, and preparing for it means talking to other people about it.
> If people don't vaccinate, and my baby gets measles before I can vaccinate her, she could die. If I have a complicated pregnancy, I could be forced to wait it out and get sepsis and die. If my friends get deported, they lose their jobs, homes, cars and I lose my connection to them. If I have to pay more for goods because of tariffs that is less money I can spend on my family.
> If I wait until my baby has measles, I have sepsis, or my friends get deported to talk about these issues and convince others, then I haven't adequately prepared for politics that can destroy my life.
I don't really understand this.
It makes sense that public policies affect one's risk of contracting measles or whether or not people get deported. What isn't clear is that one person has any measurable effect on those policies, or the opinions of others for that matter.
Generally in the US, people are pretty much on their own and would do best to take direct action to mitigate risks.
> If people don't vaccinate, and my baby gets measles before I can vaccinate her, she could die. If I have a complicated pregnancy, I could be forced to wait it out and get sepsis and die. If my friends get deported, they lose their jobs, homes, cars and I lose my connection to them. If I have to pay more for goods because of tariffs that is less money I can spend on my family.
> If I wait until my baby has measles, I have sepsis, or my friends get deported to talk about these issues and convince others, then I haven't adequately prepared for politics that can destroy my life.
I don't really understand this.
It makes sense that public policies affect one's risk of contracting measles or whether or not people get deported. What isn't clear is that one person has any measurable effect on those policies, or the opinions of others for that matter.
Generally in the US, people are pretty much on their own and would do best to take direct action to mitigate risks.
kemotep(1)
Based on my experience on this platform so far I bet this thread will lure out some of the most apathetic privileged people who’ll try to convince you shouldn’t care about other people’s wellbeing at all and that they don’t trust people who do.
In their view, having a person in charge that also lacks empathy isn’t necessarily something bad. And they’ll only change their mind once personality affected. That’s just how it works.
I could argue that it is bad, but I won’t. Because these people are literally unable to understand why people care about others.
I could argue that it is bad, but I won’t. Because these people are literally unable to understand why people care about others.
oh great, because I'm essentially a powerless serf, now I also lack empathy? way to rub it in pal haha
If you got a family member that's weird and talking nonsense, the probability that you're the smart one(s) is about the same as you being the stupid one(s).
There is an easy way to tell: who is internally coherent? Who is contradicting oneself?
Maybe, but probably not the way you think. I can imagine that Niels Bohr might have appeared somewhat "out there" to his family members. Meanwhile, from his perspective, his family likely seemed perfectly reasonable.
Quantum mechanics is weird but coherent and testable.
Chemtrails or "COVID vaccines are killing, COVID isn't" aren't.
Chemtrails or "COVID vaccines are killing, COVID isn't" aren't.
It makes perfectly sense to me that the COVID vaccines could be killing people. The amount of testing they did was very limited and the little they did wasn't really a big success. How mRNA interacts with the human cell and the immune system, nobody seems to fully understand, and the way they withheld information is highly suspicious. Just to name a few.
Thinking science is about trust and not distrust, is telling of how much one understands critical thinking. And parroting the mainstream media instead of doing your own research, has never been a smart move. My point being; just because a particular view is dominant, does not automatically means it's the correct one. Quite the opposite.
Thinking science is about trust and not distrust, is telling of how much one understands critical thinking. And parroting the mainstream media instead of doing your own research, has never been a smart move. My point being; just because a particular view is dominant, does not automatically means it's the correct one. Quite the opposite.
None of the people who proclaim they do their own research do their own research. Yes, they use Google. Yes, they might read the conclusions to other people’s research. But not a single person uses the scientific method to determine whether their hypothesis is correct. So whenever someone says that they are doing their own research, I’ll just assume they are trying to confirm their own biases and beliefs, while trying to convince others they’re skeptical and unbiased.
I see where you are coming from, but reading other peoples research is also research. And what you say about bias, is most likely true for a lot of academic research as well. And a lot of people actually do their own research.
I once tried to find the article which explains how CO2 is the cause of global warming. I read through all the IPCC reports, I read through all the referenced articles, and I read through all the referenced articles in all the references before giving up. One would think that such an important article would be easy to find, but as far as I know, it does not exist.
I once tried to find the article which explains how CO2 is the cause of global warming. I read through all the IPCC reports, I read through all the referenced articles, and I read through all the referenced articles in all the references before giving up. One would think that such an important article would be easy to find, but as far as I know, it does not exist.
You didn’t read all of it. Don’t lie.
https://blogs.bl.uk/science/2016/12/the-first-paper-on-carbo...
https://blogs.bl.uk/science/2016/12/the-first-paper-on-carbo...
It is enough who is fairing better in life. If you than most probably you are the smart one.
I agree to some extent, but I don't think it is as simple as that. Part of being smart is the amount of information we retain. For some though, the more they learn about the world around us, the more depressed they get.
>Niall is a junior studying sports journalism. This is his first semester with The State Press. He has also worked at WCSN and Blaze Radio.
Good luck Niall. Please come back in 10 years time and reread your article and let us know how you feel about it.
Good luck Niall. Please come back in 10 years time and reread your article and let us know how you feel about it.
Seems like this article was written by someone who never talked to people like that.
Asking questions may cause them to answer:
- bullshit
- incoherent bullshit
- with some shouting
- they may throw you out if question is unpleasant
- or they may answer
Thing is you may never know. How you can reason with someone that is thinking that some politician is sent by the aliens? You can't.
Oh well...
Thing is you may never know. How you can reason with someone that is thinking that some politician is sent by the aliens? You can't.
Oh well...
You can try to pull them out, but they’ll hop back in. At least in my family, having been severely abused as a child appears to have been the major risk factor for growing up into a conspiratorial adult. And no wonder.
However, asking questions is genuinely a good way to interact with these types of people when they are making a scene. It’s not to try and change their mind, though. It’s to restore an air of calm and decency that gives them a chance to reconnect socially with others in the room. But you can’t be a pushover, either, and it’s OK to just walk away, ignore it, etc.
The one thing you shouldn’t do, IMO, is try to change their mind. Your need to do that will be palpable and will fuel the fire.
However, asking questions is genuinely a good way to interact with these types of people when they are making a scene. It’s not to try and change their mind, though. It’s to restore an air of calm and decency that gives them a chance to reconnect socially with others in the room. But you can’t be a pushover, either, and it’s OK to just walk away, ignore it, etc.
The one thing you shouldn’t do, IMO, is try to change their mind. Your need to do that will be palpable and will fuel the fire.
This poor article makes no clarification on the proportion of the "groups" it divides the subjects in its own study, and just assumes in its suggestions that the family members infected with those tendencies are even interested in talking to you in the first place.
> "The idea is to keep asking questions, to keep saying 'Hey, why do you think this?'" said Marie-Louise Paulesc, an associate teaching professor for the College of Integrative Sciences and Arts who co-teaches Seeking Truth: Misinformation with Hollinger. "And understanding their position and approach it from, 'You are still my family, right?' I want to keep the communication channel open."
> Next, you can ask probing questions. Asking them to explain their views and experiences will give them a chance to see the logical fallacies in their arguments.
Ah yes, all you needed to do was question them back. Why didn't I think of that? Patience and logical reasoning is something you know they are strong at after all! /s
> "The idea is to keep asking questions, to keep saying 'Hey, why do you think this?'" said Marie-Louise Paulesc, an associate teaching professor for the College of Integrative Sciences and Arts who co-teaches Seeking Truth: Misinformation with Hollinger. "And understanding their position and approach it from, 'You are still my family, right?' I want to keep the communication channel open."
> Next, you can ask probing questions. Asking them to explain their views and experiences will give them a chance to see the logical fallacies in their arguments.
Ah yes, all you needed to do was question them back. Why didn't I think of that? Patience and logical reasoning is something you know they are strong at after all! /s
Find something else to talk about with your loved ones and friends. Don't fall into the trap of letting news or politics be the drivers of your life unless something has directly affected you.