Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien
It's harder to find absolute certainty and sensible to acknowledge alternative scenarios to those suggested by the experts but that doesn't mean we reject expert advice wholesale because of the possibility they might be wrong. It's a balance of probabilities thing.
There are absolutes in this world. If Brexit is or is not right is not one of them but some of the information we use to make such decisions can be.
There seems to be a movement to position everything into a silo of political bias and thus reject any idea of balance or impartiality. I think it's because when you do that then you can any criticism of a particular position as politically motivated and thus wrong. Partisan expertise do exist of course but the trick is to distinguish them from those who are largely* impartial. So FullFact, a group who don't seem to have any motivation to spin or a particular position they're advocating for, should be taken more seriously than 'Lawyers for Britain' whose very existence is to campaign for a political goal. Understanding the motivations of sources helps in determining their credibility.
*as impartial as you can be. Obviously many of us taken certain concepts for granted given the society we grew up in and so on.
|
Yes and there'll always be clear examples on both sides of every argument. We're still left, however, with a vast array of sources whose motives and conclusions we can't be certain of one way or the other. I think this whole argument is becoming too binary when real life isn't like that at all. It's perfectly possible for both sides of the Brexit debate to be right or wrong about certain aspects of it. It's equally likely that they're deliberately skewing 'facts' and selecting the sources which they feel best suit their argument whilst ignoring or disputing those which don't. What's the public supposed to do about that?
What's true, I feel, is that the Remain side have a whole lot more to gain by delaying/complicating this process and exploiting/creating uncertainties which may suit their argument and political standing even in the short term but won't help us to secure the best possible deal from the impending negotiations. They may not like the result but we have to get on with this now and endlessly bickering about who was more misleading than whom in the run up to the referendum is a dangerous game to play. If the House of Commons had immediately got fully behind the decision and decided to work together for the common god, would Sterling have fallen so far? I doubt it very much. In fact some may say that Sterling's value is one of the main sticks the Remain side have to beat HMG with so they have every reason to carry on creating even exaggerating uncertainties in order to put further pressure on it and thereby try to influence the general public and undermine the Government. If things carry on like this I feel we're in great danger of winding up with the worst of both worlds rather than the best or anything even approaching that. I really can't see why anyone who had the UK's interests at heart would want that.
