Talk:Post-truth

Philosophy Low‑importance

	Philosophy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 9 January 2020 and 18 April 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: Keneeso.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 02:35, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 16 January 2019 and 24 April 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Tachlis. Peer reviewers: Tanginia.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 02:35, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Solution section[edit]

A solution section would be nice --Cripplemac (talk) 09:52, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Academic Conceptualizations[edit]

The Wikipedia entry on "Post-truth Politics" is far more developed and nuanced than this entry on post-truth. Search google scholar for "post-truth," and also "post-truth society," "post-truth politics," or "post-truth and media" or "communication," and you will find a wide range of treatments, which are not primarily about debates in philosophy. That is, "truth" in philosophy since Plato can be broken into "doxa" (popular beliefs or opinions, which may or may not be accurate in a scientific or expert sense) and "episteme" (justified belief or knowledge, which in the sciences today is equivalent to "truth"). The way this entry reads right now is somewhat misleading to readers in that it looks like it emerges from debates in philosophy, which could not be farther from the truth! It needs a lot of development, especially a section on post-truth and its emergence in problems with state (in the U.S. called "government") communication, a key moment perhaps being the propaganda campaign by the Bush 2 presidency to invade Iraq (weapons of mass destruction and Iraq-Al Qaeda "links"), the 2004 U.S. election and the power of front groups like the Swiftboat Veterans for Truth, and the 2008 election and the "issue" of Obama's birth certificate and religion (Muslim, a smear campaign claimed). It was in the BUsh 2 era that Colbert coined "truthiness," for example. We need a section on popular uses and precedents and academic uses and precedents. Anyone contributing here should look at the entry for "post-truth politics" (and probably "fake news," too). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.124.92.250 (talk) 22:16, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction[edit]

The first sentence is far too dense. It may be a precise and complete definition of post-truth (I can't judge), but a definition is not necessarily the right way to begin an encyclopedia article that will be read by a general reader. It didn't help me at all.

I don't know anything about post-truth, so please could someone who does know something about it rewrite the introduction?

Thanks

Macboff (talk) 19:33, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. -- Beland (talk) 08:42, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]