|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 03/11/2007 : 19:57:54 [Permalink]
|
| OK, I give up, before this conversation gets even more petty. |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
 |
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
 Posted - 03/11/2007 : 23:23:25 [Permalink]
|
marfknox said:
quote:
OK, I give up, before this conversation gets even more petty.
It isn't petty. This goes to the very heart of what skepticism is.
No topic gets a free pass and no group or person's claims get a free pass from critical thinking.
Honestly, it is amazing to me to see people here ignore or even endorse what beskeptigal is doing in this thread. It makes you no better than the rightwingers who you freely accuse (often rightly so) of ignoring evidence or basing political positions on unevidenced and unsupportable claims!
As a skeptic I am outraged by this kind of thing. I find nothing petty about it, at all. It is a very serious issue. It is the reason some skeptic and science related boards completely forbid political talk, because they know there are plenty of people out there on all sides of issues that refuse to apply critical thinking to politics.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 03/12/2007 : 01:19:13 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
beskeptigal said:
quote:
I can't change my opinion because it bothers you, Dude. So short of that what is it you are expecting?
You were not stating an opinion. You were making a rash, and derogatory, statement about the "majority" composition of a specific group of people based on your own limited personal experience. You are seeking a way to demonize them so you can rationalize marginalizing them.
I do not expect you to change your opinion. What I expect (maybe I'm asking to much) is for you, and others, to leave the political bigotry out of political conversations here. Apply your critical thinking skills to all claims of fact regarding political issues, and be capable of minimizing your own personal bias.
When you strut in here and claim that the majority of greens are magical thinkers(based on your limited exposure to some of them), you are making a claim akin to someone saying aliens are real because they saw a dot in the sky!
The funny part is that you don't even seem to realize what you are doing.
Is there any conversation going on here or are you just going to ramble on in your own world?
I stand by my claim because that is what I have observed and I've seen no evidence to the contrary.
And, it appears I am not the only one posting in this thread who has made the same observation.
I did not come to the conclusion based on some in depth study. I stated the strength of my conclusion rested solely on my observations (that's called noting the limitations).
I understand you disagree. I understand your observations (though you haven't said upon what you base your own conclusions) are different than mine.
The rest of your post is simply beyond what has been said therefore there is no way to answer it.
|
| Edited by - beskeptigal on 03/12/2007 01:26:12 |
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 03/12/2007 : 01:25:27 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
quote:
Originally posted by beskeptigal
That I prove to myself my observations were wrong?
Seems to me that what's at issue are not your observations, but instead the conclusion you stated that you drew from those observations.
Well, Dave, if you had read my posts, I have drawn the conclusions based on the evidence I have observed. Dude has presented little evidence to the contrary. He noted the Green platform did not contain a lot of woo. I found one site that included anti-floridation of the water in the platform and that position is not supported by science and is typical of woo beliefs.
In the absence of additional information, I stand by my observations and conclusions. And I have stated the evidence that conclusion is based on, I haven't stated the evidence is overwhelming. Should evidence to the contrary be admited for consideration, I will consider it.
|
| Edited by - beskeptigal on 03/12/2007 01:27:03 |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 03/12/2007 : 12:29:37 [Permalink]
|
beskeptigal said:
quote:
Is there any conversation going on here or are you just going to ramble on in your own world?
I stand by my claim because that is what I have observed and I've seen no evidence to the contrary.
We all know that religion and politics cloud people's minds. There is even a study a year or two ago that provides evidence that people ignore critical thinking for religious and political issues.
I'm just shocked at the actual extent to which you are willing to ignore logic and critical thinking in pursuit of your political bigotry.
You tell me in what other context you would accept another person doing what you are doing now. You would NEVER accept a person passing judgement on an entire group of people based on annecdotal evidence. In fact, I know you are outraged by this exact behavior when it is rightwingers doing it to liberals.
You need to do some honest self evaluation.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 03/12/2007 : 15:11:16 [Permalink]
|
The problem here, Dude, is your assessment of "what I am doing". If all you are claiming is I've drawn a conclusion on little evidence, then you may be underestimating how much observational experience I have with the Green Party. If you think I've said I have overwhelming evidence, you may be overestimating the strength of the conclusion I have drawn.
Your claims I am less skeptical about religion and politics, while it's doubtful anyone is a perfect skeptic all the time, I am very skeptical about matters of politics and religion. I take the time to seek out extensive information to draw my political conclusions from. I look for verifiable evidence from multiple sources. I think what I post shows that extensive background of information. People may draw different conclusions, but I haven't drawn mine from minimal data.
You also fail to notice that your contrary view of the Green Party membership is based on your personal observations. You presented minimal additional supporting evidence in the way of the platform. But I don't view that platform as definitive.
You are having a cow here because we have had different personal experiences, not because of all the straw and other conclusions you have piled on to that base.
|
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 03/12/2007 : 19:17:47 [Permalink]
|
OK, I lied, I'm back in:
Dude wrote:quote:
This goes to the very heart of what skepticism is.
No topic gets a free pass and no group or person's claims get a free pass from critical thinking.
Honestly, it is amazing to me to see people here ignore or even endorse what beskeptigal is doing in this thread.
As a skeptic I am outraged by this kind of thing… It is a very serious issue.
Yes, outraged!  By this person - so “obviously incapable of thinking rationally about politics” as shown by her political prejudice! Her demonizing! Her bigotry! What's next, kitten stomping?
Seriously, could you overreact a little more?
Maybe see things a little more black and white?
(I know, dear Kil, I'm bad for not even trying to curb my sarcasm, but c'mon, Dude's accused beskeptigal of bigotry and so far nobody's called bullshit or pointed out the irony in it.)
quote:
It is the reason some skeptic and science related boards completely forbid political talk, because they know there are plenty of people out there on all sides of issues that refuse to apply critical thinking to politics.
Or maybe that's because they realize that politics is such a soft science and so full of indefinable terms that the same kind of critical thinking that is applied to, say, ghost hunting or the theory of gravity, can't be applied.
Please, wise Dude, define the commonly understood qualifications for being a “woo woo”, “idiot” and more-than-average “magical thinker”, for then I will be able to do some research and figure out whether beskeptigal's claims of “fact” are true or false.
Finally, last I checked, “bigotry” had a pretty specific meaning.
Bigotry: stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own. – Random House
I don't think calling someone a “magical thinker” (or woo woo, idiot, crackpot, fuckhead, jackass, piece of shit, cunt, or any other derogatory label) qualifies as intolerance. And seeing how beskeptigal spends a good amount of time around Greens, I doubt she's practicing bigotry against this poor defenseless group of people.
|
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
| Edited by - marfknox on 03/12/2007 19:20:46 |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 03/12/2007 : 23:56:54 [Permalink]
|
beskeptigal said:
quote:
If all you are claiming is I've drawn a conclusion on little evidence, then you may be underestimating how much observational experience I have with the Green Party.
So, now you are claiming to have met the majority of the green party? Or have conducted a scientific survey of the demographics and beliefs of the green party?
Well, if that is the case... please present your work to us here.
marfknox said:
quote:
a bunch of retarded shit
Whatever. Go fuck yourself. Kiss my ass. etc.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 03/13/2007 : 02:21:35 [Permalink]
|
Kitten stomping? Thanks again, Martha.
The conversation is just repeating itself so I think I'm content. I can say no more that would be helpful. |
|
|
|
Starman
SFN Regular
Sweden
1613 Posts |
 Posted - 03/13/2007 : 04:38:37 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
You need to do some honest self evaluation.
And you don't?
Beskeptigal is not obligated to give you adequate support for all of her opinions.
Arguing in an obvious ineffective way is not a sign of critical thinking.
|
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 03/13/2007 : 11:34:50 [Permalink]
|
Ok... if you assholes think it is acceptable to make derogatory remarks about entire groups of people based on anecdotal evidence or your own limited personal exposure to a few members of that group.... then you are obviously beyond the reach of reason.
beskeptigal is not stating an opinion when she claims that the "majority" of a group is "X". She is making an unsupportable claim, unless she has acceptable evidence to support it.
Its enough to detonate the irony gland of any rational person. People who claim that diversity and tolerance should be universal values.... except when the topic is politics! Then its a-fucking-ok to be insular and closed minded, speak randomly derogatory statements about groups you disagree with, and adopt logical fallacy as your primary defense tool when someone calls you on your hypocrisy.
Bigot, from Merriam-Webster's unabridged dictionary:
quote:
: one obstinately and irrationally, often intolerantly, devoted to his own church, party, belief, or opinion
So, yes, despite martha's alternate definition of bigot, you people who are on beskeptigal's side of this debate are supporting political bigotry.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
McQ
Skeptic Friend
USA
258 Posts |
Posted - 03/13/2007 : 12:08:00 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dude
Ok... if you assholes think it is acceptable to make derogatory remarks about entire groups of people based on anecdotal evidence or your own limited personal exposure to a few members of that group.... then you are obviously beyond the reach of reason.
beskeptigal is not stating an opinion when she claims that the "majority" of a group is "X". She is making an unsupportable claim, unless she has acceptable evidence to support it.
Its enough to detonate the irony gland of any rational person. People who claim that diversity and tolerance should be universal values.... except when the topic is politics! Then its a-fucking-ok to be insular and closed minded, speak randomly derogatory statements about groups you disagree with, and adopt logical fallacy as your primary defense tool when someone calls you on your hypocrisy.
Bigot, from Merriam-Webster's unabridged dictionary:
quote:
: one obstinately and irrationally, often intolerantly, devoted to his own church, party, belief, or opinion
So, yes, despite martha's alternate definition of bigot, you people who are on beskeptigal's side of this debate are supporting political bigotry.
Well, I sure am glad we're practicing more civility on the forum. What a complete lack of manners and class you've shown, Dude. Calling people assholes because their opinion differs from yours.
What's next? Spitting on us? Grow up. That fact is that beskeptigal did state an opinion. So did marfknox. So did I. And we all stated that it was an opinion, although, you failed to note in my message that mine was partially based on an actual poll taken among over 100 people.
That's how life is, Dude People form opinions on other people based on experiences. As an example I would like to point out that you have no evidence whatsoever that beskeptigal, marfknox, or I are actually assholes. Yet you have stated as a fact that we are.
Please provide evidence for you making that generalization of us, since a rational person would not necessarily conclude the same thing of us.
By the way, feel free to apologize for being a mannerless, caustic, nasty, mean, rude person as well. You have certainly shown who is not abiding by forum rules in this thread. |
Elvis didn't do no drugs!
--Penn Gillette |
| Edited by - McQ on 03/13/2007 12:09:15 |
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 03/13/2007 : 12:11:06 [Permalink]
|
Examples of beskeptigal being “obstinately and irrationally, often intolerantly, devoted” to her political party:
quote:
For practical reasons, I'm a Democratic Party member. But I support the Progressive movement within the party.
Some people are trying to reform the Democratic Party into the Progressive Democratic Party and there are a substantial number of people identifying themselves in this way. The established Democratic Party machine is a mess. So far I haven't seen great changes coming from Howard Dean to change that. I hope the changes are occurring but perhaps just not as publicly visible at the moment.
A lot of Democrats are idiots, that doesn't hurt my feelings at all. I don't have a personal stake in party identity.
The Green Party has some values I can identify with
Again forgive my oversimplifying of the world here.
I stated in my post that I was overgeneralizing… I was trying to discuss some larger issues without getting bogged down in political correctness.
That doesn't mean there aren't intelligent people trying to form a viable third party via the Green Party. If they can do it, more power to them. If they have good candidates, I'll be voting for them. But I happen to think it is wishful thinking given the current political state of affairs.
I'd be more than happy to reconsider the conclusions I've drawn from my limited experience with the members.
Do my posts not show a strong reflection of Green Party values?
There is a radical fringe, with many woo believers and they are attracted to the causes of the Green Party. That's all I said and it's pretty silly to claim they are not attracted to the Greens. That doesn't mean the ideals of the Green Party are bad. Of course they aren't.
Re idiots, got a better name for those who are "critical thinking challenged"? I probably should find a word that doesn't detract as much from everything else I post.
I have to go with my observations until other evidence surfaces.
I am willing to consider evidence
If you have something that contradicts what I've observed, I'll read it.
Should evidence to the contrary be admited for consideration, I will consider it.
And finally (my emphasis in italics): quote:
If you think I've said I have overwhelming evidence, you may be overestimating the strength of the conclusion I have drawn.
Dude wrote: quote:
martha's alternate definition of bigot
Not mine, Random House dictionary's.
|
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
| Edited by - marfknox on 03/13/2007 16:57:17 |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 03/13/2007 : 12:25:09 [Permalink]
|
quote:
There is a radical fringe, with many woo believers and they are attracted to the causes of the Green Party. That's all I said and it's pretty silly to claim they are not attracted to the Greens. That doesn't mean the ideals of the Green Party are bad. Of course they aren't.
They are also attracted (in lesser or greater numbers) to the Democratic Party. Not to knock anyone, but Dennis Kucinich had some good folks like Marianne Williamson backing him. Some would say that those people are woo woo folks. Again, not to mention the people that simply think there are gods and angels. |
I know the rent is in arrears
The dog has not been fed in years
It's even worse than it appears
But it's alright-
Jerry Garcia
Robert Hunter
|
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 03/13/2007 : 15:39:30 [Permalink]
|
Gorgo wrote: quote:
Some would say that those people are woo woo folks.
This statement captures the spirit of my point - that the term "woo woo" itself - while having a general meaning that we all pretty much understand when used in a specific context - is not a precise term with clear requirements. There are some people that we might all agree qualify as a woo woo (such as Sylvia Browne) and others that we might debate the woo woo status of.
quote:
Again, not to mention the people that simply think there are gods and angels.
Good point. There is certainly a whole spectrum from extreme magical thinking to hard-core rationalist. Many if not most people are somewhere in the middle. |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
| Edited by - marfknox on 03/13/2007 15:39:45 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Party, Party, Party!
