Unsubstantiated: Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
*[[Truth]] | *[[Truth]] | ||
*[[Rumsfeld’s taxonomy]] | *[[Rumsfeld’s taxonomy]] | ||
*[[Forensic | *[[Forensic epistemology]] | ||
{{ref}} | {{ref}} |
Revision as of 08:15, 24 February 2022
There are six types of known. The Rumsfeld three:
And the Jolly Contrarian three:
|
Unsubstantiated
/ʌnsəbˈstanʃɪeɪtɪd/ (adj.)
A bullshit artist’s tell. Something inconvenient or embarrassing that happened, but for which there is currently no proof or credible supporting or evidence.
To be contrasted something that did not happen, which may comfortably described as “false”.[1]
Thus, it is easy enough to disarm, by asking, “but is it untrue?”
“Substantiation” is thus a second-order property of a fact: something that, in the eyes of the outside world, falls between a “known known” and an “unknown known” in Rumsfeld’s taxonomy — call it a “not officially known”. This is a fact that, in the interior world of the person making the statement, falls squarely in the former category but, as far as she is prepared to admit to her audience, falls in the latter one.
See also
References
- ↑ We owe this observation to, among others, David Allen Green.