Library of Babel: Difference between revisions
mNo edit summary |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[File:Library planet.png|alt=Library planet|thumb|'''Figure 1'''. Imagine a every book ever written.]] | [[File:Library planet.png|alt=Library planet|thumb|'''Figure 1'''. Imagine a every book ever written.]] | ||
'''The | '''The Library of Babel is a concept detailing how information is now so abundant there is sufficient evidence on both sides of any argument to prove or disprove it.''' Hence, it is argued that expert knowledge of [[Referencing|weighted referencing]] and [[critical analysis]] skills has now become a necessity in navigating the information age. | ||
This concept comes from a science fiction short story by Jorge Luis Borges called "''The Library of Babel'' ". The tale details out this issue in a thought experiment: imagine a planet which contains all possible 410-page books of a certain format and character set. The majority of the book would be gibberish, however like 1,000 monkeys bashing the keys on typewriter for infinity, some books in the library would detail out the entire works of Shakespeare and beyond. | |||
This is analogous to the internet as the majority of content is generated on the basis of what gets clicks opposed to what is correct. A prime example of this is information about climate change. It is a fact that the vast majority of actively publishing climate scientists – 97 percent – agree that humans are causing global warming and climate change<ref>[https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/17/do-scientists-agree-on-climate-change/#:~:text=Yes%2C%20the%20vast%20majority%20of,global%20warming%20and%20climate%20change. https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/17/do-scientists-agree-on-climate-change/#:~:text=Yes%2C%20the%20vast%20majority%20of,global%20warming%20and%20climate%20change.]</ref>. However, people like [[wikipedia:Alex_Epstein_(American_writer)|Alex Epstein]] maintain that this not the case, this is not because he is more knowledgeable or even has a PhD in climate science, it is because clicks make revenue and there is a small, non-[[Neuroplasticity|neuroplastic]] population of people trying to avert [[cognitive dissonance]] and he is profiteering of this. | This is analogous to the internet as the majority of content is generated on the basis of what gets clicks opposed to what is correct. A prime example of this is information about climate change. It is a fact that the vast majority of actively publishing climate scientists – 97 percent – agree that humans are causing global warming and climate change<ref>[https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/17/do-scientists-agree-on-climate-change/#:~:text=Yes%2C%20the%20vast%20majority%20of,global%20warming%20and%20climate%20change. https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/17/do-scientists-agree-on-climate-change/#:~:text=Yes%2C%20the%20vast%20majority%20of,global%20warming%20and%20climate%20change.]</ref>. However, people like [[wikipedia:Alex_Epstein_(American_writer)|Alex Epstein]] maintain that this not the case, this is not because he is more knowledgeable or even has a PhD in climate science, it is because clicks make revenue and there is a small, non-[[Neuroplasticity|neuroplastic]] population of people trying to avert [[cognitive dissonance]] and he is profiteering of this. | ||
'''Reference''' | '''Reference''' | ||
Revision as of 20:55, 14 December 2022
The Library of Babel is a concept detailing how information is now so abundant there is sufficient evidence on both sides of any argument to prove or disprove it. Hence, it is argued that expert knowledge of weighted referencing and critical analysis skills has now become a necessity in navigating the information age.
This concept comes from a science fiction short story by Jorge Luis Borges called "The Library of Babel ". The tale details out this issue in a thought experiment: imagine a planet which contains all possible 410-page books of a certain format and character set. The majority of the book would be gibberish, however like 1,000 monkeys bashing the keys on typewriter for infinity, some books in the library would detail out the entire works of Shakespeare and beyond.
This is analogous to the internet as the majority of content is generated on the basis of what gets clicks opposed to what is correct. A prime example of this is information about climate change. It is a fact that the vast majority of actively publishing climate scientists – 97 percent – agree that humans are causing global warming and climate change[1]. However, people like Alex Epstein maintain that this not the case, this is not because he is more knowledgeable or even has a PhD in climate science, it is because clicks make revenue and there is a small, non-neuroplastic population of people trying to avert cognitive dissonance and he is profiteering of this.
Reference