Politics

[Monkeys Fist 42459]

9 minutes ago, Monkeys Fist said:

Good question 

I’ve just had a (brief) attempt and can I fuck find it, on mobile. 
 

I’ll submit a request to the relevant sub-committee who will vote on whether to send the question to the regional politburo, and get back to you in 6 years. 

Or, I’ll just let @strawb sort it. 

[Asprilla 96]

43 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

I always think of this webcomic when people talk about debate and so on - explains why people are so resistant to changing their minds:

 

https://theoatmeal.com/comics/believe

 

For my two cents on it, I think everyone knows everyone else's positions now anyway. I wouldn't go on Grimes' show either, but if I did, I'm fairly sure the entire structure of the discussion would be set up in such a way that I would not be able to get any sort of point across and that my data and evidence based arguments would be dismissed. He's not intelligent enough to have an honest debate with, certainly not a public one. It'd be like that saying "never argue with idiots, they'll bring you down to their level and then beat you with experience".

 

I would further add, never argue with anyone who isn't prepared to change their mind.

Sadly, in general, the left’s approach to ideas it doesn’t agree with is to ban them

 

i get that it can be annoying to debate with people who think so differently from ourselves and we don’t always express ourselves perfectly but nonetheless I’m always open to hearing why people think the way they do

 

 

[Alex 35095]

[Dr Gloom 21937]

38 minutes ago, Asprilla said:

Sadly, in general, the left’s approach to ideas it doesn’t agree with is to ban them

 

i get that it can be annoying to debate with people who think so differently from ourselves and we don’t always express ourselves perfectly but nonetheless I’m always open to hearing why people think the way they do

 

 

 

[Asprilla 96]

The ignore button is a great example of how censorship should work.

 

Let people say what they want, only listen to what you want.

 

 

[Rayvin 5223]

Still effectively an echo chamber though - censorship is important in places IMO, because we have too many people who can't be trusted to engage in proper critical thinking. It's a bad solution, I agree, but it is a solution. In the same way that democracy is a bad solution, but is still a solution.

 

The better option would be to develop critical thinking skills from an early age so that people learn to understand what a reliable source is, what persuasive writing looks like, how to recognise their own bias, etc. If you had that, in a robust enough system, then you could get to the point where you don't need censorship - because ordinary people could be trusted not to swallow things that aren't necessarily true.

 

There is no political flavour to this post incidentally, it applies in every direction IMO.

[Monkeys Fist 42459]

34 minutes ago, Dr Gloom said:

 

I like to think I’m a tolerant, generally easy-going bloke, a former tree-hugging hippy, heavily left-leaning but with enough experience to ground it in reality. 
Bearing that in mind, my response to this would be…

[Alex 35095]

15 minutes ago, Asprilla said:

The ignore button is a great example of how censorship should work.

 

Let people say what they want, only listen to what you want.

 

 

Wrong 

[Asprilla 96]

1 minute ago, Alex said:

Wrong 

Why? Who gets to decide?

 

Bad ideas are like germs and viruses.

 

By being exposed to them we build up immunity from them.

 

Trying to filter out everything potentially harmful is way worse for us.

[Asprilla 96]

13 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

Still effectively an echo chamber though - censorship is important in places IMO, because we have too many people who can't be trusted to engage in proper critical thinking. It's a bad solution, I agree, but it is a solution. In the same way that democracy is a bad solution, but is still a solution.

 

The better option would be to develop critical thinking skills from an early age so that people learn to understand what a reliable source is, what persuasive writing looks like, how to recognise their own bias, etc. If you had that, in a robust enough system, then you could get to the point where you don't need censorship - because ordinary people could be trusted not to swallow things that aren't necessarily true.

 

There is no political flavour to this post incidentally, it applies in every direction IMO.

i would agree except for now it’s almost impossible to find untainted sources of information

[PaddockLad 17283]

20 minutes ago, Asprilla said:

The ignore button is a great example of how censorship should work.

 

Let people say what they want, only listen to what you want.

 

 

 

What if those people are very powerful with an audience of millions and are telling blatant untruths to manipulate their audience, or to try to cling on to power?

Edited January 29, 2022 by PaddockLad

[Alex 35095]

2 minutes ago, Asprilla said:

Why? Who gets to decide?

 

Bad ideas are like germs and viruses.

 

By being exposed to them we build up immunity from them.

 

Trying to filter out everything potentially harmful is way worse for us.

Prove it 

[Kid Dynamite 7033]

1 hour ago, Asprilla said:

Sadly, in general, the left’s approach to ideas it doesn’t agree with is to ban them

 

i get that it can be annoying to debate with people who think so differently from ourselves and we don’t always express ourselves perfectly but nonetheless I’m always open to hearing why people think the way they do

 

 

Nah. 
 

You're getting "left and right" mixed up with "right and wrong". The Media do it too sometimes.

 

We don't need to hear debates around whether people should take vaccines or whether immigrants should be kicked out of the UK. Tommy Robinson, Darren Grimes, Katie Hopkins don't bring balance to an argument. They are knobs that spread hate , they should be ignored and have any opportunities to air their views in public removed. 
 

 

[Kid Dynamite 7033]

19 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

Still effectively an echo chamber though - censorship is important in places IMO, because we have too many people who can't be trusted to engage in proper critical thinking. It's a bad solution, I agree, but it is a solution. In the same way that democracy is a bad solution, but is still a solution.

 

The better option would be to develop critical thinking skills from an early age so that people learn to understand what a reliable source is, what persuasive writing looks like, how to recognise their own bias, etc. If you had that, in a robust enough system, then you could get to the point where you don't need censorship - because ordinary people could be trusted not to swallow things that aren't necessarily true.

 

There is no political flavour to this post incidentally, it applies in every direction IMO.

Doesnt matter how good you are at critical thinking or at evidencing your views if your views are fucking awful. We hopefully learned  that lesson in 1945 

[Monkeys Fist 42459]

8 minutes ago, Asprilla said:

i would agree except for now it’s almost impossible to find untainted sources of information

Yours definitely smell of taint. 
 

 

* proper intellectual response 👍

[Rayvin 5223]

16 minutes ago, Asprilla said:

i would agree except for now it’s almost impossible to find untainted sources of information

 

Agree but again, this is where you build up critical thinking. Ok so, example, my aunt is in her mid/late 60s and is a complete fruitcake IMO. She more or less 'discovered' the internet about 5 years ago and since then has attempted to argue with me on several occasions that the Pope is heading up a New world order, that aliens are already here pretending to be humans, and that you can see evidence of aliens and occult stuff in all sorts of art and religious items over the course of the centuries. We're talking full on assassin's creed storyline here.

 

She is not equipped with sufficient critical thinking skills to discern fact from fiction. She opens a website, finds that it vaguely agrees with whatever bias one has to have to believe in alien conspiracies, and runs with it. As far as she's concerned, what she has read is absolute fact and she will not be told otherwise. Because she saw it on the internet.

 

That's an extreme example, but it's a really good representation of the problem. Yes, no source of information is untainted, but if you or I read the same information sources as she has, we would come out with, I believe, some pretty healthy scepticism around it. Now, if this piece of research that she's basing her view on had been a peer reviewed piece of work that is widely supported by most of the world's experts in related fields, that would go quite a long way to convincing me that I would need to give it a serious look - but I would still engage with it using a critical mindset so that I could make peace with the concept logically. Even if it upset my worldview (which has happened to me before).

 

My aunt can't do that. She's not a 'stupid person' in the sense that she has had a fairly successful life, worked, had a family etc - but she fundamentally lacks the emotional maturity to challenge what she wants to be true with the most rational and logical interpretation of reality. And while her delusions are harmless, many others end up in the same position in support of much more harmful ideologies. Those ideologies need to be censored or controlled in some form specifically because people like my Aunt exist.

[Rayvin 5223]

4 minutes ago, Kid Dynamite said:

Doesnt matter how good you are at critical thinking or at evidencing your views if your views are fucking awful. We hopefully learned  that lesson in 1945 

 

Well, true, but I'm talking more about the receipt of information with that post rather than giving it. If you're already a nazi then the argument doesn't make much difference anymore, but the reason censorship is needed is to stop you infecting other people's minds - and the risk there comes from a large number of people in our society being so poorly equipped to differentiate between well thought out views, and total nonsense. I have a hard time believing that a hypothetical 'neutral' person who is well equipped with critical thinking and reasoning skills, could be incorporated by stealth into supporting fascist views in the way that the alt right took in many young men off the backs of wider movements like antifeminism.

[Christmas Tree 4728]

3 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

Agree but again, this is where you build up critical thinking. Ok so, example, my aunt is in her mid/late 60s and is a complete fruitcake IMO. She more or less 'discovered' the internet about 5 years ago and since then has attempted to argue with me on several occasions that the Pope is heading up a New world order, that aliens are already here pretending to be humans, and that you can see evidence of aliens and occult stuff in all sorts of art and religious items over the course of the centuries. We're talking full on assassin's creed storyline here.

 

She is not equipped with sufficient critical thinking skills to discern fact from fiction. She opens a website, finds that it vaguely agrees with whatever bias one has to have to believe in alien conspiracies, and runs with it. As far as she's concerned, what she has read is absolute fact and she will not be told otherwise. Because she saw it on the internet.

 

That's an extreme example, but it's a really good representation of the problem. Yes, no source of information is untainted, but if you or I read the same information sources as she has, we would come out with, I believe, some pretty healthy scepticism around it. Now, if this piece of research that she's basing her view on had been a peer reviewed piece of work that is widely supported by most of the world's experts in related fields, that would go quite a long way to convincing me that I would need to give it a serious look - but I would still engage with it using a critical mindset so that I could make peace with the concept logically. Even if it upset my worldview (which has happened to me before).

 

My aunt can't do that. She's not a 'stupid person' in the sense that she has had a fairly successful life, worked, had a family etc - but she fundamentally lacks the emotional maturity to challenge her what she wants to be true with the most rational and logical interpretation of reality. And while her delusions are harmless, many others end up in the same position in support of much more harmful ideologies. Those ideologies need to be censored or controlled in some form specifically because people like my Aunt exist.

You need to watch the X Files. The “truth” is out there  

[Alex 35095]

I think lots of people just say they like Darren Grimes and Laurence Fox because they like to provoke a reaction. Others actually agree with them. Not sure which is worse tbh

[Sonatine 11393]

Outside of social media, I reckon the vast majority of people don't even know who the fuck Darren Grimes is

[Asprilla 96]

59 minutes ago, PaddockLad said:

 

What if those people are very powerful with an audience of millions and are telling blatant untruths to manipulate their audience, or to try to cling on to power?

Lets take the origins of Covid as a template for this discussion.

 

The official line has shifted over time.

 

At first the idea that this virus was man made was a conspiracy theory, now it has some mainstream acceptance as a possibility.

 

But it was the alternative media that were first to explore the idea that it was man made.

 

They we’re also pushing the idea that it was caused by 5G

 

So it’s easy to straw man alternative media as pushing bullshit because some of it clearly is.

 

meanwhile the people who follow alternative media have a new example of why the MSM can’t be trusted.

 

 

 

 

[Asprilla 96]

1 hour ago, Kid Dynamite said:

Nah. 
 

You're getting "left and right" mixed up with "right and wrong". The Media do it too sometimes.

 

We don't need to hear debates around whether people should take vaccines or whether immigrants should be kicked out of the UK. Tommy Robinson, Darren Grimes, Katie Hopkins don't bring balance to an argument. They are knobs that spread hate , they should be ignored and have any opportunities to air their views in public removed. 
 

 

Most people don’t want immigrants kicked out of the U.K. but lots of people think there is too much immigration.

 

The MSM answer is again to straw man anyone who has that view as hating all immigrants.

 

 

[Rayvin 5223]

5 minutes ago, Asprilla said:

Lets take the origins of Covid as a template for this discussion.

 

The official line has shifted over time.

 

At first the idea that this virus was man made was a conspiracy theory, now it has some mainstream acceptance as a possibility.

 

But it was the alternative media that were first to explore the idea that it was man made.

 

They we’re also pushing the idea that it was caused by 5G

 

So it’s easy to straw man alternative media as pushing bullshit because some of it clearly is.

 

meanwhile the people who follow alternative media have a new example of why the MSM can’t be trusted.

 

 

 

 

 

What evidence did the alternative media have that Covid was manmade?

[Monkeys Fist 42459]

Just now, Rayvin said:

 

What evidence did the alternative media have that Covid was manmade?

None

[Asprilla 96]

1 hour ago, Rayvin said:

 

Agree but again, this is where you build up critical thinking. Ok so, example, my aunt is in her mid/late 60s and is a complete fruitcake IMO. She more or less 'discovered' the internet about 5 years ago and since then has attempted to argue with me on several occasions that the Pope is heading up a New world order, that aliens are already here pretending to be humans, and that you can see evidence of aliens and occult stuff in all sorts of art and religious items over the course of the centuries. We're talking full on assassin's creed storyline here.

 

She is not equipped with sufficient critical thinking skills to discern fact from fiction. She opens a website, finds that it vaguely agrees with whatever bias one has to have to believe in alien conspiracies, and runs with it. As far as she's concerned, what she has read is absolute fact and she will not be told otherwise. Because she saw it on the internet.

 

That's an extreme example, but it's a really good representation of the problem. Yes, no source of information is untainted, but if you or I read the same information sources as she has, we would come out with, I believe, some pretty healthy scepticism around it. Now, if this piece of research that she's basing her view on had been a peer reviewed piece of work that is widely supported by most of the world's experts in related fields, that would go quite a long way to convincing me that I would need to give it a serious look - but I would still engage with it using a critical mindset so that I could make peace with the concept logically. Even if it upset my worldview (which has happened to me before).

 

My aunt can't do that. She's not a 'stupid person' in the sense that she has had a fairly successful life, worked, had a family etc - but she fundamentally lacks the emotional maturity to challenge what she wants to be true with the most rational and logical interpretation of reality. And while her delusions are harmless, many others end up in the same position in support of much more harmful ideologies. Those ideologies need to be censored or controlled in some form specifically because people like my Aunt exist.

But this is the result of forcing people into a certain view point.
 

There is always a claim of fascism from the left but the silencing of all views other than those that are approved is much more fascistic.

 

So people drift off to god knows where to be fed god knows what. I still wouldn’t ban it but it’s the responsibility of the MSM to allow diversity of thought.

 

The current row around trans rights is a good example. People are terrified of being cancelled for expressing fairly mild views now. So people go where those views are tolerated but along the way they can and will encounter actual craziness.