Articles Summary: The Problem with Self-Investigation in a Post-Truth Era and My Problem with George Orwell

Summary of The Problem With Self-Investigation in a Post-Truth Era By Jonathan Mahler

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Mahler puts into perspective the view of self-investigations and how it is approached by various institutions. The writer begins with the example of Elgar Welch to show how self-investigation or rather seeking the truth might at times bring about disappointments. He asserts that self-investigation associated with the terms citizen and truth. He explains that the current era consists of disinformation such that it becomes difficult to analyze whether an issue is true or false. Mahler describes self-investigation as the abandonment of tradition forms of getting information such that individual results to his or her own means of finding facts.

He explains that the difference between a self-investigator and a detective is that, while a detective focuses on what is at the bottom of the line, the self-investigator overlooks this perspective and most of the time relies on the internet for information. He asserts that it is a wrong move to trust self-investigators as they depend on lies and a lot of gossips present in the social media. They overlook any information that seems to contradict their beliefs whereby he compares the appetite of a self-investigator to a continuous buffet that lacks guilt.

He uses the example of the President of the U.S., Donald Trump, who focused on self-investigation as a way of finding faults to accuse his opponents. From Mahlers perspective, self-investigation is an approach used by politicians as a way of obtaining power such that they promote their own truths such that they present their own truths and realities. He asserts that the current world is affected by technology such that any truth can be put in public without adequate support as a way of establishing the realities of the self-investigators.

Summary of My problem with George Orwell by Steven Poole

Steven Poole presents a general critique on views presented by George Orwell when it comes to the political environment. He explains that his works on politics are the shortest when compared to the rest. He also asserts that the works are the most overrated and aligns with most of the nonsense that anyone might present to be included in the newspapers. To reflect on the question as to why most people show respect for his views, he explains that most people believed that the 9/11 attack served as a fulfillment of his political prophecies of the sandy regions. He explains that the reputation of Orwells work Politics and the English Language is attributed to the facts that it accords writing tips to writers and its disapproving critique of politicians and their statements. Regardless, he views the acts to have issues. Poole explains that the most concerning aspect of Orwells scorn on political language is that it may make people disregard or misjudge what an individual is saying and hence relaxing their defensive attitudes. He prevents the view that there is need to think critically about the statements of politicians rather than ignoring them such that one is able to present an argument that brings about the truth. Poole explains that Orwells approach to political language is illogical and that he doesnt give explanations on why some words or sentence structures can be used while some should be avoided. He refers to Orwells works as uncertain when compared to the works of other writers. He terms his works as portraying bias to some authors because of their religious beliefs. He concludes by asserting that combining tips on writing is a strategy illustrating work avoidance for writers.