4 ms·
> I may still be missing something, and I’m willing to be shown that, but I’m afraid that what you’ve described isn’t the wisdom of the crowd. Well, you are cl
by arthurhur 3y ago
> I may still be missing something, and I’m willing to be shown that, but I’m afraid that what you’ve described isn’t the wisdom of the crowd.
Well, you are clearly correct that five users does not represent the wisdom of the crowd! When I submitted this post, I had different expectations about what the response would be. I figured it would be more trollish or techish and less about deep epistemological debates over definitions of truth, but I'm still enjoying this!
Okay, let's start with the objectivity of evidence. I think you're right – evidence may be objective, but evidence must be interpreted by individuals, and individuals may interpret evidence differently, thereby making the interpretation of evidence subjective. You might look up at the sky and say, "It is bright," but for someone that is blind, it is not bright.
> History is lousy with examples of the “hive mind” refusing to acknowledge new/better evidence because they are irrationally driven to avoid the shame of being wrong in their commitment to their chosen thought leader.
Of course I agree, and the whole reason why I wanted to build the app. The hive mind clearly gets it wrong so many times. My premise is that everyone believes that their version of truth is The Truth. In other words, they believe their subjective truth is objective truth. And I think the best way to settle everyone's opinions of what they believe is true is to essentially put it to a vote.
And people have a hard time admitting when they were wrong, whether it's because of ego or what-have-you. But numbers don't lie. It's something that everyone can still agree on. If the hive is wrong, it is only in hindsight, because a majority was clearly convinced something was true, and the fact that we live in the digital age means that the time it takes for something to go from true to false (or vice versa) is becoming increasingly narrow, meaning it's more important than ever to keep a record of truth over time, so we have an accurate representation of history to learn from.