Skip to main content

Seven Tiers of Opinion



The Seven Tiers of Opinion.  We are pelted by opinions on all networks, particularly cable networks. But your opinion and mine have little impact.  To make it to a network appearance, you must have a credential, or several. It seems that any credential will do, provided you have the right opinion, matching the right network. I currently see all sorts.  Let’s make a list of just seven tiers of opinion. 


  1.   Of course, the opinions of those at the top of the hierarchy gain the preferred coverage. These include former secretaries, chiefs of staff, former ambassadors, and generals at the top of the command chain.  Also, there is a plethora of CEO's, former and current.  All have some level of achievement.  Such players have opinions worthy of a listen, if only a quick one.   
  2.    Then comes the second tier.  These include talk show hosts.  Always articulate, they have a near poetic ability to express opinions.  They are often pejorative for some side of the issue at hand.  Yet, they have thought through the issues within their sphere of long rehearsed impressions.
  3. The third tier includes lower-ranking retired military officers with "military and defense" opinions, non-commissioned officers that appeal to a select audience, usually based on strength moves, and senior advisors to this or that federal agency but always available.  This group always has strong opinions, spoken with strong views, yet with only little wisdom, unless it resonates with listener personal opinions.
  4.   A fourth tier includes current and former police officials, expostulating on their views of crime and usually the lack of or inappropriateness of law enforcement.
  5. The fifth tier, and very limited, consists of the clergy or otherwise religious leader advising us on their views of spiritual issues.  Remarkably, some or our notables or celebrities, not regular people, have Tweeted and otherwise how they have found the importance of spiritual or religious needs.  Also in this tier are the climate-change and otherwise “green” advocates offering facts and other views on how the planet is being destroyed by anthropogenic causes. 
  6. The sixth tier includes a large group of academics often speaking with loud and lordly authority, which in their views must be accepted because, well, they are the intellegentsia and therefore they must be correct. So, you must believe. Academic authority has been deprecated now for decades, it being understood to be highly dependent on various intellectual yet impractical and unproven models. (Consider the French intellectuals prior to WWII.)
  7. Finally, there is a large group of experts, of all stripes, telling us of how our country is slowly being destroyed by its lack of observance and rectitude of racist, gender, and religious prejudice.

With seven tiers of opinion, we are pelted 24/7.  Forget actual news.  Forget the facts. Demagogue the past. Demagogue the now. Demagogue the future. On the networks, your future seems linked with a massive infusion of opinion.  The message, not the truth, now reign. But…

To my view, many if not most people, have developed an intuition about opinion and a semi-cynical view of it all.  They seem to have an internal compass of what to accept, but more importantly what to reject.

I have long said that for any intelligence level, there is a Ph.D. program for you.  The only requirement is that you can write a complete sentence.  In many cases, one can contract online services for a thesis and escape this small requirement.  Some of these folks wind up as legitimate commentators on TV.   

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Accepting Fake Information

Every day, we are all bombarded with information, especially on news channels.  One group claims it's false; another calls it the truth. How can we know when to accept it or alternatively how can we know it's false? There are several factors which influence acceptance of fake or false information. Here are the big four.  Some just don’t have the knowledge to discern fact/truth from fiction/fact/false*. Some fake information is cleverly disguised and simply appears to be correct. Some fake information is accepted because the person wants to believe it. Some fake information is accepted because there is no other information to the contrary. However, the acceptance of  information  of any kind become a kind of  truth , and this is a well studied topic. In the link below is an essay on “The Truth About Truth.” This shows simply that what is your point of view, different types of information are generally accepted, fake or not.   https://www.linkedin.com/posts/g-donald-allen-420b03

Your Brain Within Your Brain

  Your Bicameral Brain by Don Allen Have you ever gone to another room to get something, but when you got there you forgot what you were after? Have you ever experienced a flash of insight, but when you went to look it up online, you couldn’t even remember the keyword? You think you forgot it completely. How can it happen so fast? You worry your memory is failing. Are you merely absent-minded? You try to be amused. But maybe you didn’t forget.   Just maybe that flash of insight, clear and present for an instant, was never given in the verbal form, but another type of intelligence you possess, that you use, and that communicates only to you. We are trained to live in a verbal world, where words matter most. Aside from emotions, we are unable to conjure up other, nonverbal, forms of intelligence we primitively, pre-verbally, possess but don’t know how to use. Alas, we live in a world of words, stewing in the alphabet, sleeping under pages of paragraphs, almost ignoring one of

Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious?

  Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious? I truly like the study of consciousness, though it is safe to say no one really knows what it is. Some philosophers has avoided the problem by claiming consciousness simply doesn’t exist. It's the ultimate escape clause. However, the "therefore, it does not exist" argument also applies to "truth", "God", and even "reality" all quite beyond a consensus description for at least three millennia. For each issue or problem defying description or understanding, simply escape the problem by claiming it doesn’t exist. Problem solved or problem avoided? Alternately, as Daniel Dennett explains consciousness as an account of the various calculations occurring in the brain at close to the same time. However, he goes on to say that consciousness is so insignificant, especially compared to our exalted notions of it, that it might as well not exist [1] . Oh, well. Getting back to consciousness, most of us have view