The Intersection of Emotional Reasoning and Wikipedia's Struggle with Creators

Glasp

Glasp

Jul 28, 20234 min read

0

The Intersection of Emotional Reasoning and Wikipedia's Struggle with Creators

Introduction:

Emotional reasoning is a cognitive mechanism that often leads individuals to rely on their emotions as proof, even when those emotions may not be generated by the situation at hand. This phenomenon, first coined by psychiatrist Aaron Beck, can result in inaccurate emotional truths that contradict objective perceptual truths. On the other hand, Wikipedia grapples with the challenge of determining the notability of creators, leading to a lack of representation and skewed perspectives. This article explores the common points between emotional reasoning and Wikipedia's struggle with creators, highlighting the need for objective assessment and the potential consequences of subjective decision-making.

The Impact of Emotional Reasoning:

Studies have revealed that emotional reasoning can give rise to negative thought cycles, causing anxiety and affecting overall performance. When individuals rely solely on their emotions as evidence, they may struggle to focus, make mistakes, and experience a decline in productivity. This self-fulfilling prophecy reinforces negative thoughts, leading to a perpetual cycle of emotional reasoning. To break this pattern, it is crucial to practice validity testing, which involves searching for objective evidence to support or refute our beliefs. By examining the facts, we can challenge emotional reasoning and make better-informed decisions.

Journaling as a Tool for Self-Reflection:

Journaling serves as a valuable tool for paying attention to thought patterns and identifying when emotional reasoning influences our thinking. By recording difficult situations and the emotions or thoughts they provoke, we gain insight into our natural thought processes. This self-reflection allows us to recognize when emotional reasoning is at play, providing an opportunity to reject negative thoughts before they take hold. Through journaling, we cultivate self-awareness and develop resilience against the pitfalls of emotional reasoning.

The Subjectivity of Notability on Wikipedia:

Wikipedia, a widely used online encyclopedia, faces a significant challenge in determining the notability of creators. With only 20% of biographies featuring women out of the 1.7 million profiles, the issue of notability becomes apparent. Notability, as a concept, is inherently subjective, and Wikipedia attempts to address this by establishing detailed guidelines. The reliance on reputable, secondary media coverage becomes a crucial factor in approving biographies. However, the lack of clear criteria for notability creates ambiguity, leaving the decision in the hands of subjective reviewers.

The Role of Secondary Sources:

In the context of Wikipedia, secondary sources play a vital role in establishing credibility and notability. Mainstream publications often overlook the achievements of content creators, focusing more on traditional celebrities or established institutions. As a result, creators must rely on gaming or esports news publications, which Wikipedia does not always consider reputable enough. This discrepancy highlights the importance of recognizing the influence and impact that content creators have, as they often establish their own notability through their audience and influence.

The Gatekeeping of Information:

The struggle to define a creator's notability on Wikipedia raises questions about the gatekeeping of information. With a majority of editors being male, there is a risk of biased perspectives and limited representation. Wikipedia's reliance on what reliable sources cover perpetuates existing power dynamics, influencing both the media and the perception of creators. As the Creator Revolution continues to gain momentum, it becomes crucial to reassess how creators fit into the future of documentation and history.

Actionable Advice:

  • 1. Practice validity testing: Challenge emotional reasoning by seeking objective evidence to support or refute your beliefs. Look beyond your emotions and rely on factual information to make informed decisions.
  • 2. Engage in journaling: Reflect on your thought patterns by recording difficult situations, emotions, and thoughts. Analyze these entries to identify when emotional reasoning may be affecting your thinking and actively reject negative thoughts.
  • 3. Seek external perspectives: Discuss your emotions and concerns with trusted colleagues or friends. Their objective views can help you gain clarity and overcome the biases of emotional reasoning.

Conclusion:

The dangers of emotional reasoning and Wikipedia's struggle with creators intertwine through the subjective nature of decision-making and the potential consequences of limited representation. By recognizing the pitfalls of emotional reasoning and striving for objective assessment, we can make more accurate judgments. Similarly, by reevaluating the criteria for notability on Wikipedia and challenging the gatekeeping of information, we can create a more inclusive and comprehensive platform for creators. Embracing diverse perspectives and understanding the influence of emotions are essential steps towards a more balanced and factual representation of our world.

Resource:

  1. "The danger of emotional reasoning and using our emotions as proof", https://nesslabs.com/emotional-reasoning (Glasp)
  2. "Wikipedia's Struggle with Creators", https://cyeo.substack.com/p/wikipedia-struggle-creators (Glasp)

Want to hatch new ideas?

Glasp AI allows you to hatch new ideas based on your curated content. Let's curate and create with Glasp AI :)