https://t.co/tY8FasuWdwWhy is the U.S thought of so negatively by many?
Source date (UTC): 2017-05-21 12:26:00 UTC
Q: “CURT, HOW DO YOU HANDLE DEMANDS YOU DEFEND YOUR ARGUMENTS?”
The economics of answering questions. 😉
1) if I think the person is asking an honest question and I can answer him without extraordinary effort, I do so.
2) If I think the person is asking an honest question, but is being lazy by not doing the simple searches, I answer a bit snidely.
3) If I think the person is asking an honest question but the cost of ‘helping’ that person is too high, I ignore it, or simply say so.
4) If i think the person is challenging me, I state the truth: Truth survives criticism. It cannot be confirmed. One cannot, I cannot, defend a criticism against ignorance. One can only raise criticism if one possesses the knowledge to criticize. If one had the knowledge to criticize one would say so. If one asks for confirmation he shows (a) he is ignorant of the scientific method, (b) he lacks the knowledge to counter with an empirical or logical response showing how it cannot be true, or can be explained by more parsimonious statement, (c) he is really just imposing a cost on me by asking me to defend myself without offering a criticism to defend against. (d) therefore the individual is both incompetent, ignorant, and a liar.
5) if includes ridicule, I see it as an attempt at deception by imposing a cost on me. I attack ridicule.Then I restate the central argument. I repeat the process of returning the insult and restating the central argument – each time with minor variations – as a means of ‘chanting’ the truth, thereby ‘using’ the platform the individual has given me to (a) demonstrate his dishonesty, ignorance, and incompetence, and (b) getting across my message thru repetition.
Source date (UTC): 2017-05-21 09:33:00 UTC
RT @JayMan471: No. Because you should *never* trust scientists to interpret their data if you want to really know for yourself. https://t.c…
Source date (UTC): 2017-05-21 00:51:44 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/866094122335129600
What is the fastest way to impress a woman? https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-fastest-way-to-impress-a-woman/answer/Curt-Doolittle?share=9f45786d
Source date (UTC): 2017-05-20 22:21:14 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/866056246088040448
Why do Americans feel they must be “the greatest”? https://www.quora.com/Why-do-Americans-feel-they-must-be-the-greatest/answer/Curt-Doolittle?share=e3ea2fdd
Source date (UTC): 2017-05-20 22:10:40 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/866053588950372352
Source date (UTC): 2017-05-20 18:07:00 UTC
JOURNALISTS: DRUNKARDS, WITH POOR MENTAL FUNCTION.
by Alexander Brown
Neuroscientist Tara Swift’s peer reviewed study for the London Press Club, found that journalists are dumb and mentally operate maximally below the lowest level of the average population.
See?
That partly explain some of the nonsense we have been fed by the delusional lot in the mainstream media fraternity. And stupid me, I get so pissed with the journalistic garbage, I keep thinking the more hurried modalities to getting the whole bunch of expert local liars effectively replaced, so to sanitize the informational commons.
Now though, I could be a bit calm until the journalistic purge. As besides the deliberate pursuit of designed agenda by JOURNALISTS, I could ‘confirm’ via Tara, that these hired media lads are also mentally handicapped. So that while the western information hacks are the “dumb” lot that drink just too much and live unhealthily while engaged in the plotted dissemination of outright lies, misinformation, disinformation, and propaganda, their inferior Ghanaian counterparts that look to them for inspiration may actually deserve some sympathy than more scorn prior to the calculated purge.
Poor, and low – waged, media boys and girls are VUNERABLE FOR EXPLOITATION. Vunerables operating at some of the lowest IQs, must not be informing the people. They may have to be helped, and not allowed to continue the informational commons pollution and the promotion of agnotology.
So here is that part of interest from Tara’s:
“[T]the highest functions of journalists brains were operating at a lower level than the average population, due to dehydration, self-medicating, and fueling their brains with caffeine and high-sugar foods”.
That says loads. Enough, to inform the purge.
Alexander. May 20, 2017.
Source date (UTC): 2017-05-20 16:59:00 UTC
Answered already. Answered in detail. Search for my previous post. Please do not ‘churn’ previous posts to encourage clickbait.
https://www.quora.com/How-do-libertarians-feel-about-the-Universal-Declaration-of-Human-Rights
Answered already. Answered in detail. Search for my previous post. Please do not ‘churn’ previous posts to encourage clickbait.
https://www.quora.com/How-do-libertarians-feel-about-the-Universal-Declaration-of-Human-Rights
Becker-Posner?
Given that our criticisms of the status quo and past are the same, but our solutions overlap or are different, it might be interesting, beneficial for both of us, and beneficial for the Alt’s both left and right, if we updated and replaced the Becker-Posner debate.
I can see educating both sides, and perhaps allying both sides against the status quo. But at the very worst, it would increase the reach for both of us.
Neither of us have worthy debate partners. So our arguments are often lost in a swamp of sophisms. Improving the quality of the debate means improving the message, explanation, and nuance.
And I don’t necessarily want us to debate each other. It’s more that we could both make our cases about specific questions and let the ‘jury’ decide, as did Becker and Posner.
In other words, you make the alt-(new)-left and I make the alt-(new)-right arguments. And we draw both audiences into the discourse.
Just a thought.
Curt.
Source date (UTC): 2017-05-19 12:08:00 UTC