At the Cost of Momentum: The Case for Truth-Grounded Activism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the face of injustice, there is often a strong desire to mobilize others to immediate action. However, building public support is difficult when the issue is complicated. This leaves many activists tempted to present matters in simple, undifferentiated terms, as nuance can dampen momentum. However, oversimplification tends to be at odds with truth and it is this tension, between truth and activism, that is the focus of this paper. We begin by exploring the kind of communication that best mobilizes masses of people and note the inverse relationship between motivational as opposed to truthful communication. We then note that, though propaganda is more efficient in creating momentum, it nonetheless carries inherent dangers in that it may (i) over focus on symptoms rather than the disease; (ii) fuel authoritarian personality-types; and (iii) undermine the lifeblood of democracy. We conclude by suggesting that Philosophy for Children is a welcome educational response to this problem because it focuses on relevant contemporary issues, while fostering thinking skills that has the potential to lead to long lasting change grounded in truth. Ultimately the message is that a society and its citizens will do better by embracing pedagogical interventions aimed at fostering “active thinkers” rather than “activists.”
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".