>an inflection point where functionally all information is polluted by the possibility that it's completely hallucinated or built on something hallucinated.
Actually, that's always been the case. This isn't something new. For a while (since the start of the information age at least) we've been able to accept information presented by media, the Internet or any other source as correct and true simply because the bulk of it has been. That's not saying anything good about humanity, it's just that people don't bother to lie about most things because there's no advantage in doing so.
Between the time when language and writing began and the advent of the Internet, there was less information being passed around and a greater percentage of it was incorrect, false, or otherwise suspect than has been the case for the last 50 years. So, it was critical for everyone to question every piece of information they received, to filter what they accepted as truth from the garbage. There was still bias involved in choosing what to believe, but critical thinking was a routine part of everyone's day.
I'm interested if you know of any historical research that talks about this. I can see that as a possible theory, but the counter would be that there's a fundamental difference in the nature of 'information' between now and pre-internet, where the combination of pure bulk of data and targeting means it's much much harder to actually filter than before.
It's difficult to fix this problem by interrogatin the validity of things when consuming the information in order to interrogate it causes you to have an implicit reaction. Consider advertising that operates on raw association, or curating information feeds that are designed to provoke a specific conflict/reward response.
Actually, that's always been the case. This isn't something new. For a while (since the start of the information age at least) we've been able to accept information presented by media, the Internet or any other source as correct and true simply because the bulk of it has been. That's not saying anything good about humanity, it's just that people don't bother to lie about most things because there's no advantage in doing so.
Between the time when language and writing began and the advent of the Internet, there was less information being passed around and a greater percentage of it was incorrect, false, or otherwise suspect than has been the case for the last 50 years. So, it was critical for everyone to question every piece of information they received, to filter what they accepted as truth from the garbage. There was still bias involved in choosing what to believe, but critical thinking was a routine part of everyone's day.
I think it's going to be making a comeback.