Accurate ... not yet ...

In a world of information; we seem to be obsessed with facts but seldom question their accuracy. Then chances are we have always (as a species) been like this, just not at such a pace or volume.

Fact : there have been six James Bonds on screen
Fact : there have been seven James Bonds on screen
Fact : there have been eight James Bonds on screen

Check it out; all are true, all are quoted, most will think its six, some know its seven, how many can put a finger on number eight? In fact there is an opportunity to be pedantic and say there were nine (and not include the one who did a radio play).

Obviously this is a currently correct fact, it will eventually change.

So facts are easy, you can search the web for anything, but tend to rest at the first fact you find. This is the case in print; in media and in education. As the argument is plausible and the recipient of the fact possibly unaware, you have the luxury of perpetrating an error.

Now for the thought, how do you cope with the cognitive dissonance when a new fact conflicts with a dearly held 'original' fact. Is it the same as the moment when you gleefully discover an(other) error on the internet?


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

HeartBleed article in @ConversationUK ...

Simulation vs emulation vs virtualisation ....

Slow are the wheels that maketh the #Linux NAL ...