Introduction to Infotoxicology

I propose that Infotoxicology is a new and necessary science.

I think the word 'infotoxin' was coined by Jeff Phillips, in an article published in Adbusters sometime in the 1980s. It may have appeared earlier but I do not know of it.

The best way to explain what it is, is to lay out the axioms of this new science. This post will concern mostly those axioms - unprovable assertions which must be accepted as basis for all that follows. I have identified four such assertions. Subsequent posts will embark on a discussion of the elements of the new science.

The axioms:

Reliable information is necessary for the continuance of life, and for maintenance of its quality. We constantly interact with the world in our daily lives, and thus must deal with that which we have neither created nor can control.  The more reliable is our understanding of it, the better are our chances of not only surviving it, but improving our situation in it. A corollary to this is that life which can reliably better its circumstances is a life worth living.

Infotoxin in the mind is analogous to poison in the body. This analogy holds in several important ways. First, the effects are always deleterious. The ill effects of misguided understanding can range from near-negligible inceonvenience to death, including all possible ills between the two. Second, infotoxin very often persists, just as poison becomes lodged in the body's various hidey-holes. The spleen, the liver, the pancreas, pockets of the colon and other areas can retain poisons after our awareness of ingesting them has passed. From these places, although sequestered and controlled by the body's defenses, they can continue to cause trouble. In the same way, unexamined beliefs can affect our thinking processes and our reactions to the world long after their 'ingestion'. Thirdly, as with poisons, the act of purging them can be violently uncomfortable, more so than maintaining them in sequestration. Fourthly, such purging is very much desirable in spite of this.

Everyone lies to everyone.  Including of course themselves. Untruth and misunderstanding is a universal fact of life, and must be accepted as such even as we undertake to defend ourselves from its worst effects.

The human being of average intelligence is capable of significantly improving quality of life, by learning to distinguish truth from untruth as much as possible. Being part of the world we live in, our understanding of it will never be perfect. But here I use the word 'average' to indicate my belief that at least half of living humans, and probably much more, are sufficiently intelligent to improve their ability to detect untruth with a little study. A corollary to this is that the subject does indeed require study, just as we need practice to learn how to swim. Once certain defenses are put in place by learning the techniques I intend to propose, their operation becomes more or less automatic, and we are less easily fooled.

Soon, within a week I think, I will follow this post with an attempt to classify the various types of infotoxin, both natural and manmade.