I need to resist the impulse to come down on Player for reasons other than his terrible reasoning and ideas. The ad hominem comments are irrelevant and harden him (or anyone, for that matter) to legitimate criticisms.
Even typing this, my brain is reeling with endless snide remarks and unkind words- I feel like an addict resisting temptation.
After all this, I still have no answer to my question.
And I’ve only been here a week, and Player, ThatOneGuy and MikeYohe. … I don’t know what to make of any of them.
"And I’ve only been here a week, and Player, ThatOneGuy and MikeYohe. … I don’t know what to make of any of them."You're testing my resolve to keep the promise from my last post.
But I will say that, in my opinion, those people have a less than ideal grasp of most logical fallacies.
So I’m not alone then?
You’re not only not alone, you’re in darn good company too.
So I’m not alone then?I think I might have said something about Mike early on, and I noticed other comments about Player. I try to follow an etiquette of letting people form their own opinions. Not just because it's a nice thing to do, but if I don't, then the person I comment on might believe I have tainted the other people's opinion. So, you figured it out, you're in the club now. Two drink minimum.
Mike is in a league of his own. He thinks for himself, for sure. He often expresses beliefs that are diametrically opposed to what I see as reality. But he obviously is a seeker of knowledge (although the knowledge he seems to find is pretty far out).
Oneguy seems bright to me also, but I often get the impression that he is a far rightie, with some of the associated biases that seem antithetic to a functioning humanistic world.
My best guess about Player is that he wants to be a champion of progressive ideals, but is incapable (so far) of having a sophisticated understanding of reality, and, at the same time, he doesn’t have a clue of his lack of understanding. And his standard procedure is to angrily try to put forth narratives that he has not developed for himself, but, more likely, has taken from others, although with a simplistic and flawed understanding of what the other really said.
r/politics‘So I think I was fine’: Trump defends promoting baseless conspiracy theory about Epstein’s death
“He’s a big Trump fan. And that was a retweet. That wasn’t from me. That was from him. But he’s a man with half a million followers, a lot of followers."
So what? Do you believe the offical story?
:You are a Trump supporter, right? Yet you complained about the NYT headline about Trump bringing both sides together … ? What was wrong with that? It kind of sounded pro-Trump"
Why would the NYT publish such a headline?? What is you explanation for this?
“he really think that social media DOESN’T fuel misinformation and ISN’T threatening to erode acceptance of the results that will eventually be published? If he isn’t trying to erode that acceptance is a what is he trying to do?”
I cant believe that someone who calls himself educated wrote this and presents as a skeptic. To question the narrative they are asking you to accept when facts arent clear, events unexplianed is a not welcome by you?
“I responded that the media did expose his history of failed businesses, bankruptcies, lawsuits by employees and tenants, sex assault allegations, his incessant bragging and lying, his lack of understanding of government and geopolitics, etc. Etc. What did the media NOT expose?”
Can you provide video to show during the campaign trump being challenged by the host on these matters ??
“…events unexplianed is a not welcome by you?”
Yeah, take that, whoever Player was responding to. Events unexplianed is a not welcome by you? Explian what is a not welcome by you.
We will never be able to communicate with aliens should any make contact with us in the future. We can’t even communicate with other humans.
"I cant believe that someone who calls himself educated wrote this and presents as a skeptic." [I can't find the source of this quote.]Remember the saying: keep an open mind, but not so open your brains fall out.
Being skeptical doesn’t mean doubting absolutely everything all the time. It means you should evaluate everything until you are satisfied it is correct or incorrect (at least until more info comes your way.)
So a person believing some of the news doesn’t mean they’re not skeptical, it means they believe some of the news… that’s it.
I highly doubt the author of that quote or any of the rest of us helping you would have any problem changing our minds if reliable information that refuted what we believe, came our way.
This news. Do you 3 point accept the offical story???
Yes. In addition to those qualities, I see a lot of the Dunning-Kruger effect, as well as a lot of mansplaining (to me).
The second one is kind of weird…I’ve usually worked mostly with men, and most of my friends have been men, and I don’t usually feel as if I’m being condescended to because I’m female. And I don’t even have any evidence that these people ARE men. But I sense it nonetheless, for some reason.
Timb whenever you are cornered you bring up some ridiculous comment that makes no sense to the context of the discussion and when i press you further - there is nothing. Either you are too dumb to explain, dishonest or too embarrassed of your own convictions to reveal more.
Ok. At least you used coherent English sentences this time.
1st, you have never “cornered me” despite your apparent self perception that you have.
2nd, if you don’t understand the relevance of a response I make to you, it may be due to your own limitations.
3rd, if I don’t respond to you when you “press” for a further response, it is typically due to my perception that you are simply trying to elicit some response for which you have some hidden agenda. (You seem to do that often.) Or sometimes, your posts are just too incoherent for me to bother with trying to interpret.
I am not "dumb, dishonest or embarrassed (of my) own convictions. Tho I imagine it must be convenient for you to believe that I am. If you were to give the info, that I have tried to give you, credence it would, no doubt, threaten your half baked and faulty view of reality.
Have a look at your comment about warren and ratings. You gave me a great laugh. Thanks.