Is it even worth it to engage with these people? — Xtrix
It depends what you want in life, I guess, but for me, yes. Sometimes people who you think are nuts turn out to be right. It's healthy and productive to see people as individuals, all with different unique constellations of views, some rational, others not. It can get a bit us-and-them if we group populations according to their views and dismiss individuals within that group because of their group membership. — bert1
I, for example, have not come across anything to suppose that the virus is anything other than what it appears to be, and that vaccines are probably broadly safe, at least safer than the disease, and we should probably all get vaccinated for the good of everyone. Regarding the ninth of November, on the other hand, I think the physical evidence for controlled demolition is completely overwhelming. To even begin to change my mind on that I'd need to see a plausible explanation for the collapse of building 8 minus 1 - office conflagration isn't plausible. This isn't even a conspiracy theory. It's a physical theory based on observations; I have absolutely no idea who, how or why someone would do that. And the kind of creationism that is based on taking creation myths and stories literally seems completely baseless and contradicted by evidence. — bert1
So while the populations that hold these views might overlap considerably, they are different views, and can, and I suggest should, be approached separately. — bert1
So is it a waste if time to engage you? — frank
My take is that they're sick in some way, even if just the sickness of stupidity. — tim wood
Not worth it, for they are stuck in their notions from thoughts that so often fired together that they became very strongly wired together. It shows a fixed will to the nth degree as well as an inhibited learning disability that prevents a new and wider range of will to form beyond the stuck notion. — PoeticUniverse
So, they will die, but at least evolution has this new opening to rid us of stupid people. — PoeticUniverse
My point is that as long as one is looking for happiness outside, one is going to be faced with an endless amount of problems. Even if you were to opt for the final solution (as some in the past did) and executed it in full (as those in the past haven't succeeded), so that you'd be left only with like-minded people, you'd still be living on a planet where there are volcano eruptions, tsunamis, earthquakes, dangerous animals, unwelcome genetic mutations, limited natural resources, and at that a planet that is on collision course with some asteroids, in a solar system whose sun will eventually explode. IOW, living on such a planet and looking for happiness outside, you'd still be miserable. — baker
For me, I engage them only in the company of a third party or audience, not to persuade them but to expose the falsity of such claims before witnesses and hopefully to provoke others to question prevalent, uninformed gossip, conventional wisdom and stupifying conspiracies. Like a good gadly, I try to plant seeds of doubt in as many heads as the occasion allows. 'Shaming stupidity' (or rodeo-clownin' the bulls***) is how I roll online as well as off. :smirk: — 180 Proof
That means that conversations with those with whom you have disagreements become more important. That it becomes more important that you find a way to find common purpose with them. The great majority of people in the US share a core set of values. Mainstream, moderate, more or less pragmatic, sometimes idealistic.
Saying you're not mature enough to work with that is a pretty poor excuse given your apparent sense of impending doom. — T Clark
Is it even worth it to engage with these people?
— Xtrix
The universe was created. Who says this didn't happen 6000 years ago? If they think this is what happened... Why shouldn't I engage with them? Of course I won't argue about the creation how they view it. But I know a lot of other means to engage with creationists. Especially when they are female (though I don't think they will like me being married, nor do I think will my wife approve...). — MikeBlender
Of the categories listed the anti-vaxxers should be dealt with by a federal mandate requiring most receive the shots. — jgill
Climate change mitigation can be government/citizen actions - the priority being to prepare for what seems inevitable. Creationists I have known have not been threatening, but rational disagreement leads nowhere, usually. 9/11 Truthers, well let them babble on. — jgill
Not the best of interviews, but there are some cogent points here. — Banno
Here's part of the problem, for me: is time better spent organizing/mobilizing those who agree, or perhaps with those who are "on the fence"/ those who are more persuadable, who really just want to understand the issue and weight the evidence? — Xtrix
I wouldn't call it "impending doom," — Xtrix
Always consider the possibility that if one is unable to convince others with rational arguments, one's arguments might not be as rational and objective as one thinks. — Tzeentch
You speak as if irrationality is a trait of a minority of people. I've encountered very few people who I was convinced were truly open to being proven wrong on any subject. Virtually everyone is immune to facts/reason on many or most topics.They're immune to facts and they will not change their minds no matter what happens — Xtrix
I assume you advocate for these policies, so arguably you share some of the blame for these deaths. — AJJ
Consider it: you’re not a good person. — AJJ
Stop thinking of yourself as a good person. You’re not. Hardly anyone is. My own arrogance doesn’t even extend to that assumption about myself. — AJJ
Presumably, you're not going to sue SARS-CoV-2? What about taking part in stomping the pandemic down?
LBC radio got a caller once who had voted for the UK to leave the EU. He cried down the phone (“What have I done to my country?”) because he felt so strongly that he’d made a mistake.
How far from such feelings are advocates for these restrictions and mandates? Do they dare consider what they’ve done? It doesn’t seem so to me. — AJJ
Stop thinking of yourself as a good person. You’re not. Hardly anyone is. — AJJ
This is simple psychology. To have ones fundamental view shifted is to lose ones bearing. — Yohan
:100:Those who found a home for all their various resentments in the person of Donald Trump can't change their views about vaccinations for the virus. Election fraud and disease hoax are welded together. Getting vaccinated is tantamount to accepting that there was no fraud in the 2020 election. — Bitter Crank
:rofl: Sillier sounds of woo have never been grunted.Anti-Vaxxers, Creationists, 9/11 Truthers, Climate Deniers, Flat-Earthers...Materialists — RogueAI
Paraphrasing Churchill, 'materialism' (now sexed-up physicalism) is the most incoherent ontology or inconsistent methodology, no doubt, except for all the varieties of idealism proposed. — 180 Proof
Those policies are largely the result of the refusal of disrespectful, inconsiderate and selfish people to distance, mask, wash and vax. Had they played ball from day one, the policies would be gone months ago and we'd be back to where we were. — James Riley
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.