Read 1010 times

  • Mr C
  • The Legend

    • 3405

    • October 17, 2012, 03:00:40 pm
    • Seoul
Brandolini's Law
« on: February 23, 2022, 03:03:38 pm »
TIL about Brandolini's Law, and it perfectly explains a certain dynamic that many of us have in dealing with a few certain posters.


Quote
Brandolini's law, also known as the bullshit asymmetry principle, is an internet adage that emphasizes the difficulty of debunking false, facetious, or otherwise misleading information: It states that "The amount of energy needed to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude larger than is needed to produce it."


  • Adel
  • The Legend

    • 2018

    • January 30, 2015, 12:50:26 am
    • The Abyss
    more
Re: Brandolini's Law
« Reply #1 on: February 23, 2022, 03:13:50 pm »
TIL about Brandolini's Law, and it perfectly explains a certain dynamic that many of us have in dealing with a few certain posters.



I'm sure a fair few of us have encountered this dilemma and have simply given up while, others have clearly taken advantage of it. It's good that it's an actual thing with a name though.  ;D Perhaps it should be Marti's new nick name.


Re: Brandolini's Law
« Reply #2 on: February 23, 2022, 04:24:47 pm »
TIL about Brandolini's Law, and it perfectly explains a certain dynamic that many of us have in dealing with a few certain posters.
Look in the mirror with you and Trump-Russia and you thinking some gun nuts running around the Capitol building was actually an insurrection.

YOU are the one getting fed disinformation.

It's effing obvious on its surface- The Trump Russia thing requires you to believe that Putin approved some operation in October of 2015, during the early days of Trump's campaign while Jeb was the frontrunner and everyone assumed Trump was the next Herman Cain, that DONALD TRUMP was going to be a RELIABLE INTELLIGENCE ASSET and that the best way to put him in charge of the U.S. was with cheesy facebook posts that got 78 shares and 112 likes and DIDN'T GO VIRAL and retweets from unverified twitter users.

And this is Brandolini's Law right here- This SHOULD be all the energy required to make someone NOT believe the ludicrousness of Trump-Russia. But it isn't. Why not? Because certain posters on this site are not good at parsing media and government reports/articles/comments/claims and understanding really what's there. Their mind stops at "It's from an authoritative source and it agrees with me- It must be true!" Why? Because they lack the ability to both be impartial and to think critically and disassociate themselves from the cause they support. They also are often terrible at anything beyond first or weak second-order logic.

THAT is what you have to believe in order to accept Trump-Russia claims. It's preposterous on its face.

Same with 1/6. It requires you to believe that a bunch of gun nuts and Trump attempted to seize power through the most convoluted way possible, didn't bring their guns, and thought that the other side would just shrug their shoulders.

The media and "experts" made WMDs in Iraq sound credible and if you denied that it was "misinformation".

Do you believe the experts when they say North Korea could rain down 250,000 artillery shells in a sea of fire and kill 1 million people in an artillery barrage? You can't just regurgitate what "experts" and the MSM shovel down your throat.
« Last Edit: February 23, 2022, 04:30:32 pm by Mr.DeMartino »


  • Adel
  • The Legend

    • 2018

    • January 30, 2015, 12:50:26 am
    • The Abyss
    more
Re: Brandolini's Law
« Reply #3 on: February 23, 2022, 04:37:46 pm »
Mmm, there you have it. Anyone prepared to take on the bullshit asymmetry principle on that one? I doubt it. Brandolini  wins again.


  • Mr C
  • The Legend

    • 3405

    • October 17, 2012, 03:00:40 pm
    • Seoul
Re: Brandolini's Law
« Reply #4 on: February 23, 2022, 05:12:43 pm »
Look in the mirror with you and Trump-Russia and you thinking some gun nuts running around the Capitol building was actually an insurrection.

YOU are the one getting fed disinformation.

It's effing obvious on its surface- The Trump Russia thing requires you to believe that Putin approved some operation in October of 2015, during the early days of Trump's campaign while Jeb was the frontrunner and everyone assumed Trump was the next Herman Cain, that DONALD TRUMP was going to be a RELIABLE INTELLIGENCE ASSET and that the best way to put him in charge of the U.S. was with cheesy facebook posts that got 78 shares and 112 likes and DIDN'T GO VIRAL and retweets from unverified twitter users.

And this is Brandolini's Law right here- This SHOULD be all the energy required to make someone NOT believe the ludicrousness of Trump-Russia. But it isn't. Why not? Because certain posters on this site are not good at parsing media and government reports/articles/comments/claims and understanding really what's there. Their mind stops at "It's from an authoritative source and it agrees with me- It must be true!" Why? Because they lack the ability to both be impartial and to think critically and disassociate themselves from the cause they support. They also are often terrible at anything beyond first or weak second-order logic.

THAT is what you have to believe in order to accept Trump-Russia claims. It's preposterous on its face.

Same with 1/6. It requires you to believe that a bunch of gun nuts and Trump attempted to seize power through the most convoluted way possible, didn't bring their guns, and thought that the other side would just shrug their shoulders.

The media and "experts" made WMDs in Iraq sound credible and if you denied that it was "misinformation".

Do you believe the experts when they say North Korea could rain down 250,000 artillery shells in a sea of fire and kill 1 million people in an artillery barrage? You can't just regurgitate what "experts" and the MSM shovel down your throat.

Please limit posts in this thread to a discussion of Brandolini's Law--we don't need more examples.


Re: Brandolini's Law
« Reply #5 on: February 23, 2022, 06:58:02 pm »
Please limit posts in this thread to a discussion of Brandolini's Law--we don't need more examples.
I think it's interesting that the person who posted this people who post other such laws and examples, never consider the possibility that they themselves may be those who are affected or are susceptible to the situations that such laws/rules/concepts discuss. Invariably it is someone else who holds a different opinion.

In the case of Brandolini's Law, there are some issues-
1) Often the amount of information required to disprove something or debunking something is in fact, not that great. I would submit that "The Capitol Rioters on 1/6 not bringing loads of guns, despite being gun nuts with loads of guns" is sufficient to at the very least, cast serious doubt on the insurrection claim. In fact, it is the people trying to claim that it WAS an insurrection that are doing the gish-gallop of throwing a lot of stuff that you then have to work to actively disprove. This was also symptomatic of many of the claims against Trump.

Of course, certain people think there is Zero, No Damn Way, any of that applies to them and the people that share their beliefs because.......? I guess they think their side is infallible or something.

2) The issue might not be amount of effort in disproving something, but rather in one's willingness to be disproven and ability to process information. For example, if one makes poor assumptions (e.g. "Because someone lied to police about speaking to someone allegedly involved in a criminal conspiracy, that therefore makes them part of the criminal conspiracy", a statement which is in fact NOT a logical conclusion AND is also a mistake that even a novice investigator would know not to make), then such a poor processor of information will have trouble being able to be reasonably dissuaded or analyzing information. Furthermore, if their personality is such that even after having fallacies explained to them (such as the example above) that they refuse to admit their error and instead respond with anger, then the issue is not so much the quantity of effort necessary, but in the resistance of the person in question.

Or to put it in simplistic faux-engineering terms, it's not the amount of force YOU need to exert, it's the resistance of the object. The issue may not be one of effort and force, but rather changing the malleability of the person/object in question.

3) The people involved in declaring something truthful and the person in opposition as a liar or misinformation, often conflate opinion, and best interpretation based on the available facts, and unassailable fact. They themselves almost always lack the ability to make such a decision of fact or not. Furthermore, the basis for their conclusion of something being a fact is often based simply on authority (at best) or more frequently just based on personal whim (i.e. "CNN/Newsmax is trusted by me." *CNN/Newsmax posts an article that goes against their view "CNN/Newsmax have been bought out"). Additionally, they often frequently fail to take into consideration or actively discount the potential for said source to be motivated by agenda/bias. Furthermore, they often lack the expertise to in fact, determine if something really is truthful (e.g. "250,000 rounds+Sea of Fire) and so that again, leads them to declaring something is fact based on authority rather than it in fact, being a fact. Finally, there is the issue of determining what is 50%+1 probable vs. likely probable vs. highly-probable vs. near-certain/certain and some people really can't distinguish that, much like a certain poster on here was unable to identify when to look at things based on ranking and when a tier-structure would be more appropriate.

Perhaps spend less time on articles that reinforce your world view and instead on practicing that kind of information interpretation. Maybe with topics that don't get you emotionally wound up.

Lastly, you can see the fail right here- Brandolini's Law is in fact, not a law. It is an idea. It is not authoritative nor infallible. It is not a law in the physical sciences sense of the word, but it is treated as such by those who are most susceptible to making the mistakes it surmises.

Mr. C, if you want a real exercise in critical thought an misinformation that would do you good, do the following-

Pick 5 issues you've debated with someone on this forum. Assign a percentage value to how likely you think you are right and how likely they are right. On top of that, try to come up with at least three good reasons they might be right. THAT is one of the best things you can do to improve yourself and your ability to critically analyze information.

NOT posting some internet law as a backdoor way to trash another poster and pick a bicker.


  • Bakeacake
  • Super Waygook

    • 273

    • July 12, 2010, 01:35:40 pm
    • Pohang South Korea
Re: Brandolini's Law
« Reply #6 on: February 23, 2022, 07:00:57 pm »
....theres also Rule 34...    ya'll could settle it that way?


  • gogators!
  • Waygook Lord

    • 5845

    • March 16, 2016, 04:35:48 pm
    • Seoul
Re: Brandolini's Law
« Reply #7 on: February 23, 2022, 07:21:49 pm »
Teacher, will this be on the test?


  • Mr C
  • The Legend

    • 3405

    • October 17, 2012, 03:00:40 pm
    • Seoul
Re: Brandolini's Law
« Reply #8 on: February 23, 2022, 07:26:09 pm »
....theres also Rule 34...    ya'll could settle it that way?

Settle what?  There's nothing to settle. 

And just to continue the pedantry from the other thread, the usually accepted contraction is "y'all", because the apostrophe is replacing the 'ou' in you all.
« Last Edit: February 23, 2022, 09:35:37 pm by Mr C »


  • Mr C
  • The Legend

    • 3405

    • October 17, 2012, 03:00:40 pm
    • Seoul
Re: Brandolini's Law
« Reply #9 on: February 23, 2022, 08:27:28 pm »

Mr. C, if you want a real exercise in critical thought an misinformation that would do you good, do the following-

Literally the only thing you can teach me about is how to make a strawman.  I'll pass.

Quote

NOT posting some internet law as a backdoor way to trash another poster and pick a bicker.

What makes you think I was referring to you:  Full of yourself?  Or the ring of self-recognition?


  • Savant
  • The Legend

    • 3263

    • April 07, 2012, 11:35:31 pm
Re: Brandolini's Law
« Reply #10 on: February 23, 2022, 08:48:55 pm »
Someone's posts are already about knee-deep in bullshit.


  • Adel
  • The Legend

    • 2018

    • January 30, 2015, 12:50:26 am
    • The Abyss
    more
Re: Brandolini's Law
« Reply #11 on: February 24, 2022, 12:04:11 am »
Teacher, will this be on the test?

Long ago, back when I used to read more than Marti's topic sentences, there was something to be learned from him. He was the one who emphasised those 'emotional truths' from his hypnotherapist guru and now this. We have a living, breathing and ongoing case study in the bullshit asymmetry principle's of Brandolini.  ;D
« Last Edit: February 24, 2022, 03:12:49 am by Adel »


Re: Brandolini's Law
« Reply #12 on: February 24, 2022, 07:02:35 am »
Mmm, there you have it. Anyone prepared to take on the bullshit asymmetry principle on that one? I doubt it. Brandolini  wins again.

Oh, I like this. So, instead or refuting an argument I just say something like ďBrandolini rules?Ē  Perfect.


  • Adel
  • The Legend

    • 2018

    • January 30, 2015, 12:50:26 am
    • The Abyss
    more
Re: Brandolini's Law
« Reply #13 on: February 24, 2022, 07:24:52 am »
Oh, I like this. So, instead or refuting an argument I just say something like ďBrandolini rules?Ē  Perfect.

Do you have much experience with our man Marti? It becomes an endless war of attrition as you need to parade through his legions of strawmen. It's his MO to a tee. However, if you'd like to try him out for yourself be my guest. You sound like one of his fanboys though.
Chester Jimbo and his flat earth arguments are in much the same vein.
« Last Edit: February 24, 2022, 07:29:45 am by Adel »


Re: Brandolini's Law
« Reply #14 on: February 24, 2022, 10:49:35 am »
Literally the only thing you can teach me about is how to make a strawman.  I'll pass.

What makes you think I was referring to you:  Full of yourself?  Or the ring of self-recognition?
If you genuinely think you know more than me on everything, could learn nothing, and are ALWAYS right, then you are exactly the kind if person these various rules/effects are citing as being a problem.

Also, drop the assive-aggressive BS and at least have the guts to admit you were talking about me. At least Adel is straight up about it.
« Last Edit: February 24, 2022, 12:39:15 pm by Mr.DeMartino »


  • Mr C
  • The Legend

    • 3405

    • October 17, 2012, 03:00:40 pm
    • Seoul
Re: Brandolini's Law
« Reply #15 on: February 24, 2022, 10:52:57 am »
1) If you genuinely think you know more than me on everything, could learn nothing, and are ALWAYS right, then you are exactly the kind if person these various rules/effects are citing as being a problem.

Also, drop the assive-aggressive BS and at least have the guts to admit you were talking about me. At least Adel is straight up about it.

Don't flatter yourself, kiddo.  Brandolini's Law is quite applicable to posts from about a half-dozen folks on here.

I know I can teach you sarcasm.  What'chu got for me?
« Last Edit: February 24, 2022, 11:01:27 am by Mr C »


Re: Brandolini's Law
« Reply #16 on: February 24, 2022, 12:43:38 pm »
Don't flatter yourself, kiddo.  Brandolini's Law is quite applicable to posts from about a half-dozen folks on here.
The fact that you don't even consider the possibility that you could be one of those folks is why Brandolini's Law applies to you. Same with Adel.

If you think things like this are "Everyone else BUT me" or "All the people on this side of the argument, but not mine", then you're effing delusional. Now, you could say something like, "I'm pretty confident it's them and not me in this case" and that is fine because you've injected doubt and limited it to a specific argument, but if you think this is NEVER you? Then you're clueless and lacking in self-awareness.

And of course you were referencing me at some point. Adel explicitly mentioned me. Stop pretending, Be straight-up.


  • Savant
  • The Legend

    • 3263

    • April 07, 2012, 11:35:31 pm
Re: Brandolini's Law
« Reply #17 on: February 24, 2022, 01:00:26 pm »
If you think something is about you then you meet the tenets of the law. Congratulations!


  • Mr C
  • The Legend

    • 3405

    • October 17, 2012, 03:00:40 pm
    • Seoul
Re: Brandolini's Law
« Reply #18 on: February 24, 2022, 02:48:07 pm »


The thing is, mate, Iíve been on this board longer than you have, and the only posters ever to accuse me dishonesty, BS, bad faith arguments etc are folks like you, shaneberry, Kliuchevski, Jester Chim and Hankook.  So thatís the company in which you reside.

Meanwhile, practically everyone else here has called you out for your despicable BS posting habits like truth shading,  straw men, what about USM, endless name-calling, goalpost moving, endlessly repeating the same debunked crud, etc.

Now, is it possible that the list I included you with is right, and the rest of the board is wrong and Iím the one violating Brandoliniís Law with regularity? Iíll have to think about that.

Okay, Iíve thought about it, and No.  Itís you.
« Last Edit: February 24, 2022, 03:16:31 pm by Mr C »


  • Savant
  • The Legend

    • 3263

    • April 07, 2012, 11:35:31 pm
Re: Brandolini's Law
« Reply #19 on: February 24, 2022, 02:57:43 pm »
Marty defended the actions of the Sewol captain back on Daveís (when it was a thing). Thatís all you need to know about the absurd positions he takes.