View Full Version : What Does Misinformed Mean?

10-25-04, 02:37 PM
Political affiliations aside; What does it mean to you? Curious.

Does it imply somebody just going on about issues he doesn't really know about.

Citing what someone says about something without knowing all the facts about what they were talking about or for that matter know how they were talking about it?

Someone who is voting party lines regardless.

Someone who only get's their political info from sites such as speedguide and not really looking at speeches, records, and the like?

Voting for someone because of one issue/reason and ignoring the rest?

Listening to somones opinion even though that person is biased for other reasons than just the issues.

This election seems to be causing the word to be thrown around quite a bit and I don't think it's being used correctly in most cases. To me, an example would be someone only believing what bush/kerry says about bush/kerry.

Let me know what you think. Examples would be good, bashing kerry OR bush would be bad. Practice your diplomacy, you never know you just might get married someday and need it :D

10-25-04, 02:57 PM
To me someone that was misinformed would be a person who, even tho events that have transpired , documented, discovered, or uncovered , even thoough are known to be wrong are still believed to be the right choices.


10-25-04, 02:57 PM
The bottom line...and you can flame me for this...

there is no way that one of us can know everything there is to know about the candidates/issues in the six months from the announcement of candidacy to the polls

therefore...we are all misinformed (and I admit to being misinformed)


10-25-04, 02:58 PM
To me misinformed means you are spouting something that you believe is “fact” but in actuality it is not the correct “fact”. This is extremely common.

For example you think that Car A is red maybe because someone told you car A was red or maybe for some other reason, but you are misinformed because in reality Car A is blue.

This also ties in with ignorance, and ignorance is NOT a bad word.

EVERYONE is ignorant; no person on this Earth knows everything.

The key is to not act like you have all the info, but instead assimilate all the info you can, and listen to other people because they may have a piece of info that you do not, learning is a constant process and it never stops.

To not be misinformed you need to go the source, if you can, to get the facts.

The definition of ‘fact’ is here: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=fact

The definition of 'misinformed' is here: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=misinformed

10-25-04, 03:23 PM
brent- What you're saying is true, obviously, but I think it goes beyond simple right and wrong. Another example of what i am talking about would be Kerry's voting record. Now, we have all seen/heard the adds and some of us have even looked up his record ourselves. That said, I would say that someone is misinformed if they go strictly off of his voting record to see how he will vote on something in particular in the future. You can forecast it based on his record, but to do so and go only by that is to me being misinformed. You see what I mean? There really isn't a right or a wrong in that, but one is making a more informed decision than the other. You can guess, but you can't say for sure.

kind of like saying that al gore wouldn't have gone to war with Iraq. He might have, he might not have. saying that since a republican did a democrat wouldn't is just guessing, might be right a lot of the time, but still a guess. 9/11 wouldn't have happened if gore was in office, same thing.

going ahead, other countries will like us better if kerry is in office. COuld be true, might be true for 3 months, might not be true at all. If you are voting for kerry based on that you're misinformed IMHO. There will be a draft if Bush is relected. Voting based on that presumption is , again IMHO, being misinformed.

Anyone see what I'm getting at here? Whether you vote for kerry, bush, or nader. Don't do it based on assumptions, predictions, or dislike for a person or party. Vote with a good reasonable idea of why you are voting for who you are. Because he's the lesser of two evils doesn't count. If you look hard enough there is a difference between them and you can find it...if you look. Be informed. and when/if you're person loses don't cry about it. You did what you could, what more can you ask for.

damn, time to run for office I think :D

10-25-04, 04:25 PM
Misinformed is easy. To me it means you were told something to be factual, you accepted it....but it in fact may not be true.

It's like if a co-worker told you that you are to report to your job at 0800hrs when in fact the boss has set your job to start at 0730hrs. Now mind you, the co-worker could have thought it was the right time...meaning no malice. Or it could be a deception to cause you to be late. Either way....you were not provided with the right information. when deception or malice is involved...it is now disinformation.

Now to be uninformed means you simply don't now....or maybe even care to know.

the key to misinformation is a lack of validation. If I don't validate the info and just accept it at face value, I may be passing on this misinformation.

also, if someone is informed and knows that the information is wrong but accepts it anyway...that is borderline negligence.

10-25-04, 04:43 PM
^ what he said!

excellent post

10-25-04, 04:45 PM
^^^^ better definition, I'll go for that

10-25-04, 04:49 PM
Personally, I think Brent and UOD's posts are spot on. Nothing more to add, really.