Page 3 of 5 [ 68 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 18,534
Location: USA

11 Jan 2019, 8:35 pm

Pointing out flaws in reasoning, doesn't equal apologetics.

I know I'm supposed to fall in line with the mob mentality, express unreasoning hatred, and not do any critical thinking. But that's not how my mind works.



karathraceandherspecialdestiny
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 22 Jan 2017
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,800

11 Jan 2019, 8:44 pm

EzraS wrote:
Pointing out flaws in reasoning, doesn't equal apologetics.

I know I'm supposed to fall in line with the mob mentality, express unreasoning hatred, and not do any critical thinking. But that's not how my mind works.


Yes, you're the only unbiased person here, and that makes you better than everyone. You've told us this many times. You are a logical thinker, truly objective, and we are all emotional hysterics who can't apply reason to anything. Got it.

Now that we've paused to acknowledge it, can you please stop telling us about how totally unbiased you are compared to the rest of us shlubs? It's getting tired.



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 35,734
Location: Stendec

11 Jan 2019, 8:46 pm

EzraS wrote:
... I know I'm supposed to fall in line with the mob mentality, express unreasoning hatred, and not do any critical thinking ...
You are not supposed to do any such things. You have the right to be in love with the president, to believe that his unreasoning hatred of Mexicans is valid, and to use what you call "critical" thinking if you want.

The rest of us do not have to agree with you. We don't even have to pay attention to you. In any case, we are as free to criticize your actions and opinions in any way that does not violate The Rules of this website as we are free to express opinions of our own.

I suggest that you learn to deal with it.



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 35,734
Location: Stendec

11 Jan 2019, 8:49 pm

karathraceandherspecialdestiny wrote:
Yes, you're the only unbiased person here, and that makes you better than everyone. You've told us this many times. You are a logical thinker, truly objective, and we are all emotional hysterics who can't apply reason to anything. Got it.
Your sarcasm is both noted and welcomed.
karathraceandherspecialdestiny wrote:
Now that we've paused to acknowledge it, can you please stop telling us about how totally unbiased you are compared to the rest of us shlubs? It's getting tired.
Agreed.



MrsPeel
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 1 Oct 2017
Age: 47
Gender: Female
Posts: 510
Location: Australia

11 Jan 2019, 8:50 pm

I don't think my feelings are unreasoning hatred, more a mix of dislike of the man together with valid issues over his lack of rational thinking and reasoned debate.

Take this border wall, for example.
What analysis has Trump put forward to show that this border wall will be beneficial and recoup the cost involved in building it through societal improvements?
Anyone?



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 35,734
Location: Stendec

11 Jan 2019, 9:04 pm

Analysis? None.

Assumptions? False Accusations? Racial Profiling? Attacking the Opposition? Lies and Deceptions? The server for this website may not have the capacity to all the details of every instance.



MrsPeel
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 1 Oct 2017
Age: 47
Gender: Female
Posts: 510
Location: Australia

11 Jan 2019, 9:42 pm

Agreed. Seems to me the logical brain would be asking:

1. How big a problem is illegal immigration? And we need numbers here - not just numbers of immigrants, but the demographics of who they are, and how much of a burden they are on society e.g by taking jobs. And not only how much of a burden they are but how much benefit they are, too, e.g. by creating jobs. And then evaluation of the net scale of the issue.

2. Why is this illegal immigration happening? What are the socio-economic drivers? Because you can't solve a problem until you understand it.

3. What are the options for addressing this? Do we spend huge money on a wall or would that huge money be better spent on other measures? In my work as an engineer I'm expected to present 3 options and assess the pros and cons of each before making a recommendation, so why should we accept less from the government? Where are the option comparisons and the cost-benefit analysis?

I mean, I'm not entirely naive and I know the above kind of analysis rarely happens with any president - politics is driven by ideology not by logic. But at least some are willing to be guided by experts who understand the issues. Obviously Trump is not one of those.

So I'm failing to see how supporting Trump can be seen as logical and rational. When the man acts like a dictator, the logical action of those aware of historical precedents would be to speak up against him.

Edited to add: putting this forward in the spirit of a debate, this is not intended as an attack on Ezra. I absolutely defend his right to state his point of view without risk of personal attack.



LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,252
Location: USA

11 Jan 2019, 10:24 pm

MrsPeel wrote:
Agreed. Seems to me the logical brain would be asking:

1. How big a problem is illegal immigration? And we need numbers here - not just numbers of immigrants, but the demographics of who they are, and how much of a burden they are on society e.g by taking jobs. And not only how much of a burden they are but how much benefit they are, too, e.g. by creating jobs. And then evaluation of the net scale of the issue.

2. Why is this illegal immigration happening? What are the socio-economic drivers? Because you can't solve a problem until you understand it.

3. What are the options for addressing this? Do we spend huge money on a wall or would that huge money be better spent on other measures? In my work as an engineer I'm expected to present 3 options and assess the pros and cons of each before making a recommendation, so why should we accept less from the government? Where are the option comparisons and the cost-benefit analysis?

I mean, I'm not entirely naive and I know the above kind of analysis rarely happens with any president - politics is driven by ideology not by logic. But at least some are willing to be guided by experts who understand the issues. Obviously Trump is not one of those.

So I'm failing to see how supporting Trump can be seen as logical and rational. When the man acts like a dictator, the logical action of those aware of historical precedents would be to speak up against him.

Edited to add: putting this forward in the spirit of a debate, this is not intended as an attack on Ezra. I absolutely defend his right to state his point of view without risk of personal attack.

This topic isn't about immigration.

This topic is about whether Trump's incoherent speech pattern makes him an "idiot" or "mentally-ill".

What's your opinion about people with incoherent speech patterns?

How do you contrast that to "Weak Central coherence" theory in autism?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weak_cent ... nce_theory


_________________
After a failure, the easiest thing to do is to blame someone else.


EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 18,534
Location: USA

11 Jan 2019, 10:51 pm

LoveNotHate wrote:
MrsPeel wrote:
Agreed. Seems to me the logical brain would be asking:

1. How big a problem is illegal immigration? And we need numbers here - not just numbers of immigrants, but the demographics of who they are, and how much of a burden they are on society e.g by taking jobs. And not only how much of a burden they are but how much benefit they are, too, e.g. by creating jobs. And then evaluation of the net scale of the issue.

2. Why is this illegal immigration happening? What are the socio-economic drivers? Because you can't solve a problem until you understand it.

3. What are the options for addressing this? Do we spend huge money on a wall or would that huge money be better spent on other measures? In my work as an engineer I'm expected to present 3 options and assess the pros and cons of each before making a recommendation, so why should we accept less from the government? Where are the option comparisons and the cost-benefit analysis?

I mean, I'm not entirely naive and I know the above kind of analysis rarely happens with any president - politics is driven by ideology not by logic. But at least some are willing to be guided by experts who understand the issues. Obviously Trump is not one of those.

So I'm failing to see how supporting Trump can be seen as logical and rational. When the man acts like a dictator, the logical action of those aware of historical precedents would be to speak up against him.

Edited to add: putting this forward in the spirit of a debate, this is not intended as an attack on Ezra. I absolutely defend his right to state his point of view without risk of personal attack.

This topic isn't about immigration.


What Trump said in the OP is about human trafficking.



EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 18,534
Location: USA

11 Jan 2019, 10:53 pm

karathraceandherspecialdestiny wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Pointing out flaws in reasoning, doesn't equal apologetics.

I know I'm supposed to fall in line with the mob mentality, express unreasoning hatred, and not do any critical thinking. But that's not how my mind works.


Yes, you're the only unbiased person here, and that makes you better than everyone. You've told us this many times. You are a logical thinker, truly objective, and we are all emotional hysterics who can't apply reason to anything. Got it.

Now that we've paused to acknowledge it, can you please stop telling us about how totally unbiased you are compared to the rest of us shlubs? It's getting tired.


Not all. Some. And not confined to WP. However if you feel the shoe fits....



EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 18,534
Location: USA

11 Jan 2019, 11:01 pm

Fnord wrote:
EzraS wrote:
... I know I'm supposed to fall in line with the mob mentality, express unreasoning hatred, and not do any critical thinking ...
You are not supposed to do any such things. You have the right to be in love with the president, to believe that his unreasoning hatred of Mexicans is valid, and to use what you call "critical" thinking if you want.

The rest of us do not have to agree with you. We don't even have to pay attention to you. In any case, we are as free to criticize your actions and opinions in any way that does not violate The Rules of this website as we are free to express opinions of our own.

I suggest that you learn to deal with it.


I agree completely. And of course it's a two way street.

It's funny to me how some feel Trump saying Mexico and other countries down south have bad people is considered expressing hatred towards them. And yet the same ones saying that, say people from Mexico and other countries down south need asylum from all the rapists and murderers etc there.



Last edited by EzraS on 11 Jan 2019, 11:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Hollywood_Guy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Nov 2017
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Posts: 577
Location: US

11 Jan 2019, 11:06 pm

Not an apologist or defender of Trump per se, but I dislike how conservatives and their ideas face more social pressure on average than liberals.



auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 81,832
Location: the island of defective toy santas

11 Jan 2019, 11:12 pm

MrsPeel wrote:
I don't think my feelings are unreasoning hatred, more a mix of dislike of the man together with valid issues over his lack of rational thinking and reasoned debate. Take this border wall, for example. What analysis has Trump put forward to show that this border wall will be beneficial and recoup the cost involved in building it through societal improvements? Anyone?

analysis, schmanalysis, according to the MAGAs, they don't need no stinkin' analysis, they just want what the enemy of their enemy wants, just atavistic tribalism, is all that is going on. that awful man's speech patterns are not at issue, it is the personality/conduct/ethical defects which drive those speech patterns that are at issue for POTUS.



LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,252
Location: USA

11 Jan 2019, 11:20 pm

Ron Perlman demonstrates Trump's typical speech pattern.

Trump seems to jump from detail to detail (rambling), rather than speak in a unifying big picture, top-down manner.

This gives the impression of incoherence.


_________________
After a failure, the easiest thing to do is to blame someone else.


BeaArthur
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Aug 2015
Posts: 4,545

11 Jan 2019, 11:56 pm

I like Ezra, so I don't engage with him on political topics. He's wrong, but I don't feel the need to prove it to him.

:o


_________________
Back in the frozen tundra, dreaming of crocuses.