How much is this our brain doing lazy reasoning, and how much is this strategically correct reasoning under cultural constraints.
E.g. if I admit that I believe allegations against A, then I the norms of our culture demand that I must stop associating with A. But if A has a lots of good qualities, then the cost of stopping associating with them is high, so I might want to take that into account.
I.e, the debate that is superficially about [are the allegations about A true] is actually about [should we kick out A], and most people know this on some level and act accordingly.
If this is what is going on, then the only way to stopp this “fallacy” is to change the incentive some how. This would include making it common knowledge that after we find out the truth of the allegations, there is a second step of waying the pros and cons of having this person around. But that can get into very taboo territory.
How much is this our brain doing lazy reasoning, and how much is this strategically correct reasoning under cultural constraints.
E.g. if I admit that I believe allegations against A, then I the norms of our culture demand that I must stop associating with A. But if A has a lots of good qualities, then the cost of stopping associating with them is high, so I might want to take that into account.
I.e, the debate that is superficially about [are the allegations about A true] is actually about [should we kick out A], and most people know this on some level and act accordingly.
If this is what is going on, then the only way to stopp this “fallacy” is to change the incentive some how. This would include making it common knowledge that after we find out the truth of the allegations, there is a second step of waying the pros and cons of having this person around. But that can get into very taboo territory.