Useless Information
The irony is that those with the least information are the most committed and those with the most information are the least committed
The concept of useless information is an excellent example of the pragmatic corollary that everything is relative. Which is to say, what might be considered useless information by some or even many can also be highly prized by others…even many others. This comes to mind because a central theme in my last post was about cosmology and astronomy, two topics that do not qualify as useful information to many — including my wife. I know this because after we watched a segment on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert in which the guest was a famous (to some) astrophysicist discussing and demonstrating gravitational waves, she had a question.
She looked at me and asked of what possible use, in a practical way (she’s also very pragmatic), was any of this information. Whatever geekish qualities I might have, I knew that it was reasonable to doubt the actual value of knowing any of this stuff. That the most important person in my life was asking this gave added importance to my reply. We’re both highly intelligent, but in different ways — basically hers is far more practical than mine. So I told her that while I received immense value from this kind of information, one could certainly live a long and satisfying life without knowing any of it…maybe.
I didn’t actually include the maybe because she has no religious or spiritual inclinations. But for those who do, the cosmic sciences demonstrate why the creation story — which is based on oral traditions among ancient cultures — is nothing but a fable, a tale of mysticism and superstition that is not remotely real in any way. I always recommend Isaac Asimov’s In The Beginning for a detailed history of the variations of this pre-science answer to where did we come from. Realizing that humans have only existed for the tiniest period of time relative to the ages of the universe and the earth should be reason enough why the cosmic sciences matter so much in understanding what is real and what is not.
But let’s agree in principle that individuals have the right to decide what is useful and useless information. This combines personal freedom with personal responsibility to know what matters…as members of society and as citizens. While cosmology may be optional, knowing facts and data about the state of one’s society and the political landscape should not be. After all, how can one make good decisions and choices on issues without basic information. Understanding the physics of cosmology is not relevant, whereas understanding what is truth and what is political/ideological nonsense is functionally essential to responsible citizenship.
That many of those who live in what is the world’s wealthiest and most privileged country don’t know and don’t care about this inevitably raises the question of why. Actually, this is not the most important question. The critical question is how ignorance is considered reasonable and acceptable. The excuse I read and hear is that anger at how dysfunctional everything is seems sufficient justification for responding to ignorant rhetoric. But where is the upside of this? To an intelligent observer there is none, with only a steep downside.
The intellectual disconnect is that those who are most open to new ideas (and information) and would be described as center-left are the deadbeats of citizenship. Unlike those who believe their country is being taken from them and will vote to stop this perception from continuing, those who are mainstream and/or liberal stay home and complain instead of voting. They insist it doesn’t matter, but that is intellectual fraud. While conservatives went to the polls and elected other conservatives, moderates disregarded all the information they had and did nothing. The information was/is useful but the response was/is useless.
The irony is that those with the least information are the most committed and those with the most information are the least committed. In other words, emotion seems more motivating than intellectual knowledge. Does this make information useless? The answer is an obvious no. Personal and financial success in the twentieth-first century are dependent on ever-greater knowledge, not less, but processing information is not uniform and consistent. My perception is that complexity is not the issue with how one earns a living but becomes a barrier when it comes to being just one person in a nation of ~240 million voting-age adults.
Sometimes the motivation to vote isn’t as much about useful information as about voting against a candidate deemed so undesirable that participating feels essential. This likely explains why voting among those who are mainstream seems more important when it’s a presidential election rather than congressional even though the latter is actually equally important. Useful information still matters, but it’s the sense of emotional commitment that motivates. I’ve always noted that even pragmatists acknowledge the existence of emotional responses in how we make choices. The lack of a pragmatic component with emotional low-information voters is the most significant negative factor democracy faces every election.
