|
|
| Post Number: 21
|
TheTaxMan 
Controversial Thug
Group: Members
Posts: 874
Joined: Apr. 2001
|
 |
Posted on: Jun. 26 2002,23:07 |
|
   |
Yes, as in the entire forum...
Read these websites that show I'm right!
--------------
Four billion years of evolution and this is all we have to show for it?
|
 |
|
|
| Post Number: 22
|
Darth Liberus
Emperor of Detnet
Group: Members
Posts: 2246
Joined: Jan. 1970
|
|
Posted on: Jun. 27 2002,01:19 |
|
 |
hmm.
i read mainstream news, and draw my own conclusions from there.
lykosis & CK mostly read "alternative" news and parrot it because they know people are stupid and therefore the mainstream is never right.
i say the People aren't sheep. people have a natural tendency to question things. unfortunately, nobody can know everything, so they get lied to and mislead a lot by people who sound like they know what they're doing.
those people make the punishment for questioning swift and severe.
try questioning lykosis & CK sometime. see if they provide you an honest, well-thought-out answer... or if they just attack you for being "stupid."
Edited by Darth Liberus on Jan. 01 1970,01:00
--------------
"let's travel around with our laptops, plug in, and destroy the very fabric of modern reality." -a2n3d7y
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 23
|
Beastie Dr
I will abort you.
Group: Members
Posts: 293
Joined: Apr. 2002
|
|
Posted on: Jun. 27 2002,02:34 |
|
|
ARE YOU IMPLYING THAT THEY MIGHT NOT KNOW EVERYTHING? YOU'RE IN DEEP SHIT, PAL!
--------------
"Bladow, blazwoks!"
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 24
|
Bozeman
Guardian
Group: Members
Posts: 762
Joined: Jun. 2000
|
|
Posted on: Jun. 27 2002,04:11 |
|
|
Ck is just trying to stay on topic, by providing an example of how to sound like an idiot. Posting like CK raises red flags.
--------------
It's the pop-o-matic bubble, motherfucker!
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 25
|
Pravus Angelus
Codito Ergo Sum
Group: Members
Posts: 81
Joined: May 2002
|
|
Posted on: Jun. 27 2002,04:15 |
|
|
DSL, some thoughts:
on the notion of "intellectual slopiness". It sounds like your main objection is the misuse of words, or possibly their misinterpretation, but not their actual use. There are many different words that have very similar meaningings, but the subtle distinctions sometimes have important impacts (lol, red flag?, read "effects" if you prefer) on the final meaning of the point. I'm not sure it's ever good to restrict the pool of communication, although certainly appropriate use helps (and I agree with you, sometimes people on detnet have a tendency to innapropriately use certain words).
on "rational / irrational". Here's a find example of where limiting use of these words would change the meaning of an argument. In the so you want to go to heaven debate, Wix and myself make a point that many terrorist perspectives are rational. Note, we are not suggesting that their reasons are sound per se, but that there is a reasoning process, wheras earlier posts had given us the impression that certain people's perspectives were more of the "crazy freedom-hating arab". Replacing rational with sound doesn't work here.
on "logic, objectivity". Before I start I should piont that I do see where you're coming here on this one. I disagree with your analysis, but people do have a tendency to severely misuse both of these words. However, the very point of logic is to create a common ground between people who disagree. I don't think claiming an argument to be fallacious is any less overloaded. As for objectivity, I have to disagree with you on it's lack of meaning outside of science. If person A goes out and kills someone with a rusty screwdriver (dangerous items) and he gets charged with it, there is objective truth. The objective truth is that he did indeed commit this action. Obviously the more abstract or moral you get the harder it is to find objective truth. But even in religion, there is an objective truth. Either the world was created by a single sentient being, it was created another way or it was not ever created at all. Only one of these can be the answer for the beginning of the universe (unless you get into "sum over histories" stuff, at which point physics becomes confusing as all hell) and the fact that we can't ever (theoretically) know whether or not God exists in no way eliminates or alters the objective truth of whether or not he does.
on "bias and emotional argumentation". I agree with you pretty much 101% (1% margin of error) on this one. There's always some bias and always some emotion and it would be fallacious to say to these elements invalidate an argument. I might have a huge bias toward a certain position, but if my reasoning is sound then it makes no difference.
I hope I didn't come off as too critical.., I understand where you're coming from, but I think I'd focus more on people using words correctly (not necessarily etymological correctness, but at least something commonly accepted) than eliminating them from detnet vocabulary.
--------------
"Lately, the only thing keeping me from being a serial killer is my distaste for manual labor"
--Dilbert
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 26
|
Darth Liberus
Emperor of Detnet
Group: Members
Posts: 2246
Joined: Jan. 1970
|
|
Posted on: Jun. 27 2002,10:01 |
|
|
the reason I call them "red flags" isn't that their usage invalidates an argument, but that when you stumble upon while you're reading it's time to stop for a second and think about what the author is really trying to say.
doubly so when you're writing something.
in the thread you refer to, you can avoid rational by saying their arguments are reasonable or that they make sense. by using these words, you're not only being more specific, but you also deftly undermine a possible attack by your opponents. "rational" is so closely associated with "unemotional" that someone can say "but look how emotional their arguments are; they're irrational."
as for logic/objectivity - Reason is the proper name for the common rules, axioms, and protocols that lead to good debate. There are instances where the words logic and objectivity are appropriate, of course, but 99% of the time when someone uses those words they're trying to bring the factual certainty of mathematics and science into an area where factual certainty doesn't exist.
as for eliminating them, i have neither the power nor the desire to erase words from the detnet vocabulary; as for criticism, it's always welcome. I certainly don't know everything. I generally only get upset if the person criticizing me is doing so to stoke their own ego or reputation rather than trying to enlighten the debate. Or if I'm having a really horrible day 
---
i just realized I didn't answer editor's question a few posts back... leftist propaganda is generally stupid on the surface because it's derived from strong emotions and generally not well thought-out... i.e. they see dolphins caught in a net (which IS a sad sight), so they sit down and write about how we should ban all fishing because they gotta protect the dolphins because dolphins are beautiful. they don't think it through beyond that. it's written from the heart and not the mind.
right-wing propaganda is derived from the needs of certain people to have unlimited power, authority, and control. but you can't just walk out and say "I WANT UNLIMITED POWER! I WILL CRUSH j00 ALL LIKE BUGS! HAHAHAHAHAHA!" - nobody in their right mind would ever trust anything you said ever again. People don't give away authority easily; you either have to earn it or trick them into giving it to you. Since people are (usually) smart enough to not put tyrants into power, the right wing and other power-hungry folk have to resort to trickery to get it.
Consider our friend Richard... he's not right-wing, but he would like nothing more than to be the #1 Man In Charge Of Everything. But no one is just going to up and give him that, and he certainly doesn't want to earn it. So instead he acts like he's a nice, reasonable, well-intentioned individual, while at the same time trying to very smoothly assassinate the character of anyone who might oppose him.
Those of us who are familiar with him get him to crack every time... good job, Detvets! 
Edited by Darth Liberus on Jan. 01 1970,01:00
--------------
"let's travel around with our laptops, plug in, and destroy the very fabric of modern reality." -a2n3d7y
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 27
|
veistran
We don't listen to people that don't like us.
Group: Members
Posts: 967
Joined: May 2000
|
|
Posted on: Jun. 27 2002,10:26 |
|
|
personally, a word that raises a big red flag for me is truth because there's a big difference between truth in general and truth in the more factual sense.
--------------
V|-
"Headed down the hard way
Concrete battleground
Urban monkey warfare
Sabotage underground camouflage"
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 28
|
lykosis
DetVet
Group: Members
Posts: 109
Joined: Jun. 2002
|
|
Posted on: Jun. 27 2002,14:08 |
|
|
| Quote (Darth Liberus @ 26 June 2002,17:19) | hmm.
i read mainstream news, and draw my own conclusions from there.
lykosis & CK mostly read "alternative" news and parrot it because they know people are stupid and therefore the mainstream is never right.
i say the People aren't sheep. people have a natural tendency to question things. unfortunately, nobody can know everything, so they get lied to and mislead a lot by people who sound like they know what they're doing.
those people make the punishment for questioning swift and severe.
try questioning lykosis & CK sometime. see if they provide you an honest, well-thought-out answer... or if they just attack you for being "stupid." |
DL,
i don't mostly read alternative news. i post alternative news sources because i'm sure that by this point everyone has heard of the great CNN. i have never advocated anything as being 100% true or non-biased. EVERYTHING should be considered carefully before being swallowed...that goes for my posts, your posts, anything. i'm a little disapointed, but not surprised, that you would stoop to insulting me rather than try to engage in a conversation with me. Ck did the same thing to me on puce. perhaps that is just how things tend to go on detnet.
i've never attacked anyone for being "stupid". i would happily answer any question put forth to me, unfortunately, you don't seem interested in that at all. you seem more interested in being a complete prick, in taking a us vs them attitude, in drawing conclusions about how i think/feel without asking me. you've already decided that i'm the enemy, and you have absolutely no idea how i feel/think about most issues. that makes me sad.
oh, and if you are drawing conclusions about me from "you say you want to go to heaven" thread. you need to understand that i was really emotional when i originally wrote that...i wrote it on the 11th of sept....and added to it right after i talked to some people i know in palestine. i'm not the best person to debate on the middle east...i have a lot of emotional ties to that area, and emotions tend to cloud judgement/rationality. see palestine v israel as an example.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 29
|
Darth Liberus
Emperor of Detnet
Group: Members
Posts: 2246
Joined: Jan. 1970
|
|
Posted on: Jun. 27 2002,14:54 |
|
|
that was a very well-written reply; you defended yourself admirably.
much of what I gleaned about you I got from your web site. but my impressions could well be wrong, and I jumped the gun on kicking your ass.
/me hates self for a couple seconds.
I quit Paxil a mere two weeks ago. That's my excuse.
I'm still dead-on about CK though, aren't I?
--------------
"let's travel around with our laptops, plug in, and destroy the very fabric of modern reality." -a2n3d7y
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 30
|
lykosis
DetVet
Group: Members
Posts: 109
Joined: Jun. 2002
|
|
Posted on: Jun. 27 2002,17:50 |
|
|
your impression is more than likey wrong, since i don't have a website. sorry for the misunderstanding...
as far as CK, i can't really comment on your opinion of him...he seems to be pretty intelligent, but perhaps a little too emotional about issues at times (we are all guilty of this). i have no quarrel with him, or anyone else here, and i think detnet is better off with his voice, as well as yours.
i hate paxil.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
