I stated a truism. I'm not misleading — Yohan
I meant to say that both sides, those who are married to mainstream narratives, and those married to counter-mainstream narratives can both be immune to facts. — Yohan
You're free to be a coward, but I've said elsewhere, although I don't have a death wish and will do basic things to protect myself, I will not let fear control my life. — Derrick Huestis
It does matter when it effects other people. These ideas do effect the other people. So no, you're not "free to it" at that point. I can't act in a way that harms others, regardless of my beliefs.
— Xtrix
So why don't you sue them? — baker
Oh, and "to affect" and "to effect" are two different verbs. — baker
It's on you to spell out what exactly it is that you want, and then act in ways that will lead to your goal. — baker
Dude, look at what he said in the sentence right before the one you quoted:Though not free of the virus (which took your freedom). — jorndoe
For me, I chose what works for me. I took the vaccine and use the mask when obligated, which isn't often. Works for me, I've never gotten covid, and if I did and died oh well, at least I died a free man. — Derrick Huestis
Sure, when you have the luxury which often up to monster. Some dangers are zerosum, bordering on lose-lose (pyrrhic), where it takes a monster to defeat a monster. Last resort, yeah; but not unthinkable. — 180 Proof
The "them", the "those people". Those in the title of your thread.Sue who? — Xtrix
*sigh*Affect and effect are overlapping. I decided a while ago not to bother with "affect."
How pathetic that you resort to this, by the way. Can't say I'm totally surprised.
So you have a goal (to change other people's minds), but you're not interested in getting to that goal.It's on you to spell out what exactly it is that you want, and then act in ways that will lead to your goal.
— baker
I'm not interested.
That's too simplistic. I find that I distrust people in positions of power who pretend to be friendly toward me, but who also have at their disposal lethal force and a track record of using it.Having said that anti-vaccination sentiment does seem to come down to distrust and fear of authority. — Janus
The "them", the "those people". Those in the title of your thread. — baker
*sigh*
You know, it would help your case to spell properly. Mixing up verbs like you do makes you look irrational and emotional. And incompetent. — baker
So you have a goal (to change other people's minds) — baker
Good luck with your amazingly constructive attitude! — baker
I am speaking of motives or attitudes. Not views.You think it's a truism, but it isn't. It treats everything as if there are "two sides," and there aren't. Are there really "two sides" to whether the earth is flat? No. Also, even in less extreme examples, like with climate change, where one person is in concurrence with the overwhelming scientific consensus and the other isn't, it's completely misleading to suggest they're equally irrational. — Xtrix
Some experts are counter-mainstream narrative.I meant to say that both sides, those who are married to mainstream narratives, and those married to counter-mainstream narratives can both be immune to facts. — Yohan
Both are non-experts who choose who they trust. . — Xtrix
If a minority expert offers more compelling arguments for their views than the "overwhelming scientific or medical consensus" than it is rational believe them.If one trusts the overwhelming scientific or medical consensus, that's simply a better choice than the other non-expert who chooses to trust Internet conspiracy theories. — Xtrix
Also, there is nothing inherently irrational with being in concurrence with the overwhelming scientific consensus. — Yohan
If a minority expert offers more compelling arguments for their views than the "overwhelming scientific or medical consensus" than it is rational believe them. — Yohan
There is also nothing inherently irrational with not being in concurrence with the overwhelming scientific consensus.Also, there is nothing inherently irrational with being in concurrence with the overwhelming scientific consensus. — Yohan
I agree. — Xtrix
I talk about minority experts and bring up as an example, Alex Jones?You're in no position to judge if it's more or less compelling. Which is why plenty of people get sucked into Alex Jones. He's very compelling, too. — Xtrix
There is also nothing inherently irrational with not being in concurrence with the overwhelming scientific consensus. — Yohan
I talk about minority experts and bring up as an example, Alex Jones? — Yohan
Am I in a position to determine who I can trust? Or should I consult an expert on that as well? — Yohan
Which is why plenty of people get sucked into Alex Jones. He's very compelling, too. — Xtrix
Which is why plenty of people get sucked into Alex Jones. He's very compelling, too.
— Xtrix
Are you saying I shouldn't take horse deewormer and shit my pants in the grocery store? Or end up shitting all over the ER? — James Riley
That's not my goal and wasn't the question of this thread. If I could snap my fingers and change people's minds, fine -- but in the real world, I know very well it often can't be done and is, essentially, a waste of time. Much like this discussion with you. — Xtrix
Affect and effect are overlapping. — Xtrix
Affect and effect are often used interchangeably. There's a subtle difference, but both convey the same basic information to English speakers. — Xtrix
Yes, affect and effect are different. One is a verb, one is a noun. — Xtrix
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.