Keeping truth's requirements close
During a one-on-one parsing of his essay in an academic writing class, one of my college students last fall said to me with, I might add, a benign irreverence: 'Well, close enough.'
To which I said, 'Well … no.' Without a hint of irreverence, benign or otherwise.
My student's shrug of indifference was neither mean-spirited nor brimming with meaning. He was simply reflecting society's retreat from precision to an acceptance of 'close enough.' Bless his undergraduate heart, he was encapsulating this troublesome modern phenomenon: our lack of respect for being exact, a subset of the ongoing miasma of misinformation.
Cigars, horseshoes and hand grenades aside, close in such a misinformed world doesn't cut it. We should be demanding the truth, especially when we need it most: buying a home, making a medical decision or voting for a president.
From unintentional imprecision to blatant propaganda to campaigns of disinformation, we too often settle for close enough when we should be clamoring for clarity — not in-the-ballpark or close enough but actual commodities like real evidence and actual proof. To stay afloat in today's 'flooded zones' amid the just-made-up stuff, we need real details.
This is neither a scold nor an argument for some robotic, mechanical speech, which while perhaps clean and careful, lacks humanity. I'm saying only that if we insist and rely on microscopic tolerances in everything from the Keurigs that brew our morning coffee to the razors that keep us shorn to the 737s that fly us around the world, why not demand more rhetorical rigor and truth telling, particularly from leaders who write policies and craft legislation?
Close enough is far too often not enough, whether it's at a local school board meeting, in the Nebraska Legislature or even during a joint session of Congress where, as recently witnessed, elected leaders — who should know better — stood and cheered not simply their approval of a little linguistic license, but also a litany of out and out lies.
Three circumstances are working against us. That's the bad news. The good news is that each can be overcome. The first is our wont to diminish the work and wisdom of experts, particularly in science and academia. At the low end of this continuum is a community of online 'specialists,' who, armed with Google and a conspiratorial mindset, continue to disbelieve those with advanced degrees, years of experience and the respect of professional peers.
Sometimes, even the well-intentioned bypass expertise. When the Nebraska Legislature grappled with bills related to gender-affirming care, it passed laws despite the overwhelming testimony of health care professionals to the contrary. The 'post-truth' world dismisses empirical research for claims based on emotions or personal beliefs.
When facts lose their significance, the vague, the untrue and the nonsensical can't be far behind.
Related to our growing disdain for facts and science is confirmation bias, a cognitive condition that occurs when we give preference to and stronger trust to that which fits into what we already believe. In other words, we believe it more because we already believe it. We all do it. But consequences follow.
For example, if I already consider the federal government bloated, I'm more likely to believe Elon Musk's DOGE is finding hundreds of billions of dollars in waste, fraud and abuse rather than the more accurate view that the savings being realized are at much lower numbers and are more likely the result of clerical or computer errors than fraud.
When numbers are thrown against the wall like spaghetti, rather than looking only for which ones stick, we should be paying more attention to those that don't.
Finally, the Illusory Truth Effect holds sway in our social media-driven world. That's the psychological occurrence that tricks us into believing that repetition equals truth, that lies must not be lies because we've heard them so often.
On the internet the most valuable commodity is a click. The Illusory Truth Effect translates clicks into truths, even when the opposite is true.
As has been written in this space before: If a 1,000 people say a stupid thing, it's still a stupid thing.
My student rewrote his essay … and without rolling his eyes — or at least not in front of me. The new draft, with more rigor and evidence, strengthened his argument. I'm not sure what lesson he learned, if any. But he never used that line on me again.
I only hope he — and the rest of us — understands that when truth is on the line, more than 'close enough' is required.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


New York Times
9 minutes ago
- New York Times
Marjorie Taylor Greene Asks for George Santos's Sentence to Be Commuted
George Santos, the disgraced former congressman and notorious fabulist who pleaded guilty to wire fraud and aggravated identity theft after being expelled from the House, has been in federal prison for 11 days on a sentence of more than seven years. On Monday, one of his former colleagues began a formal effort to get him out. Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, the brash Georgia Republican and MAGA adherent, sent a letter to the Justice Department's pardon attorney asking that Mr. Santos's 87-month prison term be commuted, calling it 'excessive' and a 'grave injustice.' Ms. Greene's letter came just days after President Trump, who has doled out pardons or clemency to staunch supporters and others favored by his right-wing base, did not rule out offering a pardon to Mr. Santos, saying only that he had not been asked. 'Nobody's talked to me about it,' Mr. Trump said on Friday in an interview on the right-wing channel Newsmax. Still, the president, who is known for his own exaggerations and outright falsehoods, acknowledged Mr. Santos's reputation. 'He lied like hell,' Mr. Trump said. 'And I didn't know him, but he was 100 percent for Trump.' It was an accurate assessment. Mr. Santos, 37, rode into Congress in January 2023 as the object of national scorn after The New York Times and other outlets uncovered that he had fabricated much of his résumé, including a booming Wall Street career and ties to Sept. 11 and the Holocaust. He was ejected that December, after three-quarters of the House voted to expel him. But during his 11-month stint in Congress, Mr. Santos, a Republican from New York, frequently aligned with hard-right lawmakers like Ms. Greene. And even before he took office, Mr. Santos was a reliable Trump loyalist. After both men lost their elections in 2020, Mr. Santos repeated the president's debunked claims of election fraud and falsely insisted that he, too, had an election stolen from him. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.


NBC News
39 minutes ago
- NBC News
Nebraska Republican faces rowdy town hall with questions about Epstein files and fired BLS chief
Rep. Mike Flood, R-Neb., held a town hall Monday that started with boos from the crowd shortly after he took the stage and ended with chants of 'vote him out' when the event ended. In between, the Nebraska Republican was consistently heckled while responding to questions about releasing more information on Jeffrey Epstein, President Donald Trump's firing of the Bureau of Labor Statistics commissioner and cuts to Medicaid in the GOP's 'Big, Beautiful Bill.' Audience members began yelling at Flood and booing him when he talked about Medicaid and the impact of Trump's sweeping domestic policy law on hospitals in Nebraska. Flood argued that there's 'a lot of misinformation' about the 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act,' which no Democrats voted for when it made its way through Congress this summer. Later he faced a question that suggested he was covering up files related to Epstein. Flood responded by saying he supports releasing the files and will co-sponsor a non-binding House resolution calling for their publication. Flood added that he supports an effort led by House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer, R-Ky., to have Epstein co-conspirator Ghislaine Maxwell sit for a deposition. Comer last week postponed Maxwell's deposition, previously scheduled for Aug. 11, until at least October to let the Supreme Court decide in late September whether it will review her case. Flood also weighed in on the firing of BLS chief Erika McEntarfer, who Trump dismissed Friday shortly after the agency published figures showing that hiring in the U.S. had significantly slowed significantly in recent months. The congressman suggested he might have handled the situation differently, while adding that he does not know 'all the details' about McEntarfer's firing. 'I don't know what the situation was with the Department of Labor person. Neither do you. I don't know. I don't know,' Flood said. 'I can tell you I've been an employer for a lot of years, and there's always two sides to every story, and I don't know what that side was. I will say this, though, if all that person did was get the data out there, if all that, and I don't know that's the case, but if that's all they did, I would not have fired her.' Several Republican senators, as well as economists and statisticians, took issue with Trump terminating McEntarfer last week. Audience members yelled, jeered and booed throughout the event, with audible chants of 'free Palestine,' 'tax the rich,' and during the town hall's conclusion, calls to 'vote him out.' When Flood attempted to engage with audience members on those topics, he was largely met with more protests. Attendees asked at least three different questions about the Department of Homeland Security and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, specifically about Florida's 'Alligator Alcatraz,' which one attendee called 'Alligator Auschwitz.' Inquiring about the immigration detention facility in Florida, one attendee asked Flood, 'How much do taxpayers have to pay for a fascist country?' Flood responded to by saying the majority of Americans voted for Trump and not for Democratic nominee Kamala Harris. 'Americans voted for a, for a border that is secure, and I support the president enforcing our immigration laws, which, by the way, were written by Congress,' he added, prompting more boos. The Nebraska Democratic Party encouraged people to attend Flood's town hall, telling voters of Nebraska's 1st Congressional District in a social media post, 'you know what to do!' The party also encouraged attendance at Flood's last in-person town hall in the state, in May, when he was grilled by audience members and at one point conceded he had not read a bill in full before voting in favor of it.


The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Brazil's Supreme Court orders house arrest for former President Bolsonaro, a Trump ally
SAO PAULO (AP) — Brazil's Supreme Court on Monday ordered the house arrest for former President Jair Bolsonaro, on trial for allegedly masterminding a coup plot to remain in office despite his defeat in the 2022 election — a case that has gripped the South American country as it faces a trade war with the Trump administration. Justice Alexandre de Moraes, who oversees the case against Bolsonaro before the top court, said in his decision that the 70-year-old former president had violated precautionary measures imposed on him by spreading content through his three lawmaker sons. Bolsonaro's lawyers said in a statement that he will appeal the decision. They said his words 'good afternoon, Copacabana, good afternoon my Brazil, a hug to everyone, this is for our freedom' — broadcast from a cell phone of one of his sons during a Sunday protest in Rio de Janeiro — cannot 'be regarded as ignoring precautionary measures or as a criminal act.' The trial of the far-right leader is receiving renewed attention after U.S. President Donald Trump directly tied a 50% tariff on imported Brazilian goods to his ally's judicial situation. Trump has called the proceedings a ' witch hunt,' triggering nationalist reactions from leaders of all branches of power in Brazil, including President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. The case against Bolsonaro Brazil's prosecutors accuse Bolsonaro of heading a criminal organization that plotted to overturn the election, including plans to kill Lula and Justice de Moraes after the far-right leader narrowly lost his reelection bid in 2022. Monday's order followed one from the top court last month that ordered Bolsonaro to wear an electronic ankle monitor and imposed a curfew on his activities while the proceedings are underway. Following news of the arrest order, a staffer with Brazil's federal police told The Associated Press that federal agents had seized cell phones at Bolsonaro's residence in the capital of Brasilia, as ordered by de Moraes in his decision. The staffer spoke on condition of anonymity due to their lack of authorization to speak about the matter publicly. Bolsonaro is expected to remain in Brasilia for his house arrest as he is not allowed to travel. He also has a house in Rio de Janeiro, where he held his electoral base as a lawmaker for three decades. The former army captain is the fourth former president of Brazil to be arrested since the end of the country's military rule from 1964 to 1985, which Bolsonaro supported. 'Flagrant disrespect' The move from the Brazilian justice comes a day after tens of thousands of Bolsonaro supporters took the streets in the cities of Sao Paulo and Rio, pleading for Brazil's congress to pardon him and hundreds of others who are either under trial or jailed for their roles in the destruction of government buildings in Brasilia on Jan. 8, 2023. On Sunday, Bolsonaro addressed supporters in Rio through the phone of one of his sons, which de Moraes' described as illegal. 'The flagrant disrespect to the precautionary measures was so obvious that the defendant's son, Sen. Flávio Bolsonaro, decided to remove the posting in his Instagram profile, with the objective of hiding the legal transgression,' de Moraes wrote. Lawyers for the former Brazilian president did not make comments after the decision. Flávio Bolsonaro claimed on X that Brazil 'is officially in a dictatorship' after his father's house arrest. 'The persecution of de Moraes against Bolsonaro has no limits!' the senator wrote. De Moraes added in his ruling that Jair Bolsonaro, who governed Brazil between 2019 and 2022, has spread messages with 'a clear content of encouragement and instigation to attacks against the Supreme Court and a blatant support for foreign intervention in the Brazilian Judiciary' — likely a veiled reference to Trump's support for Bolsonaro. De Moraes also said that Bolsonaro 'addressed protesters gathered in Copacabana, in Rio' on Sunday so his supporters could 'try to coerce the Supreme Court.' Last week, the U.S. Treasury Department announced sanctions on de Moraes over alleged suppression of freedom of expression and the ongoing trial of Bolsonaro. 'Justice will not allow a defendant to make a fool out of it,' de Moraes said in his decision. 'Justice is the same for all. A defendant who willingly ignores precautionary measures — for the second time — must suffer legal consequences.' Possible trouble ahead Creomar de Souza, a political analyst of Dharma Political Risk and Strategy, a political consultancy firm based in Brasilia, said Bolsonaro's house arrest opens a new moment for the country's opposition, which will could gather steam in fighting against Lula's reelection bid next year. Now, de Souza said, 'the 2026 election looks like turmoil' and the political debate in Brazil will likely be split between two key struggles. 'One is the effort of Bolsonaro supporters to keep strong on the right, no matter if it is pushing for amnesty in congress or putting themselves physically out there,' the analyst said. 'The second is how the Lula administration will try to show that the country has a government.' 'This is just the start,' he concluded. The latest decision from the top court keeps Bolsonaro under ankle monitoring, allows only family members and lawyers to visit him and seizes all mobile phones from his home. Lula was imprisoned for 580 days between 2018 and 2019 in a corruption conviction that was later tossed out by the Supreme Court, citing the bias of the judge in the case. Michel Temer, who became president after Dilma Rousseff was impeached in 2016, was arrested for 10 days in 2019 in connection with a graft investigation, which later ended without a conviction. Earlier this year, de Moraes ordered the detention of President Fernando Collor, who was in office from 1990 to 1992 until he was impeached. The 75-year-old former president was convicted for money laundering and corruption in 2023 and is now serving his more than eight-year sentence.