Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 73
Thanks Tree110Thanks

Thread: Have You Ever Stopped and Thought It All the Way Through?

  1. #31
    Veteran Member Pragmatist's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    50,183
    Thanks
    15205

    Quote Originally Posted by Rasselas View Post
    I think just attacking the source is intellectually lazy. Usually when a polemical source offers a patently inaccurate report, it's possible to demonstrate it's inaccuracy or the illogic of its argument.
    When you continually see rightwing editorials posted as some sort of fact then demonstrating they are inaccurate is giving them credence they do not deserve. This is not to mention that demonstrating they are inaccurate isn't going to change the mind of the dipshit posting them. They will be back the next day peddling the same ridiculous bullshit. If the link happens to be a credible AP news source that you will find a dozen credible news sources with articles on then it may deserve a reply, otherwise "bullshit" is a more appropriate reply.

  2. #32
    Veteran Member bajisima's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    46,330
    Thanks
    28363

    From
    New Hampshire
    Quote Originally Posted by Rasselas View Post
    I think just attacking the source is intellectually lazy. Usually when a polemical source offers a patently inaccurate report, it's possible to demonstrate it's inaccuracy or the illogic of its argument.

    We should be skeptical of all the arguments we hear, however, and it's useful to see things vetted in front of a audience that opposes them. That's the real value of debate--leaving no stone unturned in the critical examination of claims and evidence.
    Skepticism is a great thing. There sure are crazy sources out there but just dismissing news out of hand is indeed lazy. I recall that attack in Paris (Bataclan) where the shooters went in that music hall and shot nearly 100 people there. For whatever reason FOX was the first source with that info online and someone posted it as breaking news. Immediately we ended up with 4 pages of "FOX news really??" or "dont believe it." Then it broke on all the other sources. It really made people look foolish. Its that silliness that makes me nuts. If its truly breaking news, just wait a second and it will appear everywhere.
    Thanks from Wonderer and Rasselas

  3. #33
    Flibbertigibbet Wonderer's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2014
    Posts
    26,350
    Thanks
    17569

    From
    Missouri
    Quote Originally Posted by bajisima View Post
    Skepticism is a great thing. There sure are crazy sources out there but just dismissing news out of hand is indeed lazy. I recall that attack in Paris (Bataclan) where the shooters went in that music hall and shot nearly 100 people there. For whatever reason FOX was the first source with that info online and someone posted it as breaking news. Immediately we ended up with 4 pages of "FOX news really??" or "dont believe it." Then it broke on all the other sources. It really made people look foolish. Its that silliness that makes me nuts. If its truly breaking news, just wait a second and it will appear everywhere.
    Well-said.

    It's interesting because "attacking the source" wasn't the primary point of my inquiry but merely an example of some of the behavioral patterns in play here. There are legitimate reasons (and times) to question sources but often that seem to become the focus rather than a substantive discussion.
    Thanks from bajisima and Rasselas

  4. #34
    Veteran Member bajisima's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    46,330
    Thanks
    28363

    From
    New Hampshire
    Quote Originally Posted by Pragmatist View Post
    When you continually see rightwing editorials posted as some sort of fact then demonstrating they are inaccurate is giving them credence they do not deserve. This is not to mention that demonstrating they are inaccurate isn't going to change the mind of the dipshit posting them. They will be back the next day peddling the same ridiculous bullshit. If the link happens to be a credible AP news source that you will find a dozen credible news sources with articles on then it may deserve a reply, otherwise "bullshit" is a more appropriate reply.
    Well sometimes I might put up either a right wing or left wing op ed as something to discuss. I wont put an op ed in current events, but I will put in political discussion or ideology. I just think it might be something interesting to discuss. Get perspective.
    Thanks from Wonderer and Ian Jeffrey

  5. #35
    Veteran Member bajisima's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    46,330
    Thanks
    28363

    From
    New Hampshire
    Quote Originally Posted by Wonderer View Post
    Well-said.

    It's interesting because "attacking the source" wasn't the primary point of my inquiry but merely an example of some of the behavioral patterns in play here. There are legitimate reasons (and times) to question sources but often that seem to become the focus rather than a substantive discussion.
    It does and it tends to ruin the thread. If I see something weird I will Google the topic and read other reports to see what actually happened. Many sources do exaggerate or create false headlines to attract interest. But most of the time there is truth in there. Its rare (unless someone posts a FB story or conspiracy theory) that its completely untrue.
    Thanks from Wonderer

  6. #36
    Veteran Member Dr Sampson Simpson's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    22,023
    Thanks
    12274

    In order to discuss ideas, you actually have ideas in the first place. Have facts,logic and reasoning to back it up. People that don't just attack source and do nothing but deflect have no ideas, no facts, no logic to back up anything.
    Thanks from Wonderer

  7. #37
    Spock of Vulcan Ian Jeffrey's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    64,805
    Thanks
    32869

    From
    Vulcan
    Quote Originally Posted by bajisima View Post
    There sure are crazy sources out there but just dismissing news out of hand is indeed lazy.
    It does depend on the source, and the nature of the source. There are legitimate news outlets that often get all their news from the AP, for example, and this includes both Fox and CNN. I did a check once, and all the major outlets were carrying the exact same stories. However, even from there, we find opinion pieces being represented as "news." This is even worse when it comes to extremist sources (e.g., Daily Caller, DailyKos), where the "news stories" are so full of loaded language that they are practically opinions masked as and pretending to be news. Thus, dismissing sources such as those out of hand is a reasonable shortcut.

    Quote Originally Posted by bajisima View Post
    Well sometimes I might put up either a right wing or left wing op ed as something to discuss. I wont put an op ed in current events, but I will put in political discussion or ideology. I just think it might be something interesting to discuss. Get perspective.
    In that situation, though, you are not representing that op-ed as being news.
    Thanks from Wonderer, bajisima and jacobfitcher

  8. #38
    Veteran Member bonehead's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    15,310
    Thanks
    5688

    From
    south
    Quote Originally Posted by Wonderer View Post
    Sorry - for the semi-vague thread title, but I'm just interested in throwing this out for discussion. Seems as though a significant portion of the energy expended on this board (and many like it) is directed toward discrediting "the other guy." Whether it's questioning the source(s) linked, or playing the "whatabout" game, or pointing out the perceived hypocrisy of those on "the other side." So...just wondering...what, really, is the end game?

    If the "other side" is discredited, does that mean we don't have to consider what they're saying? I do realize some comments/positions are so extreme as to perhaps not warrant a substantive response. But I do sometimes get to wondering what we (most of us) are actually doing? Hoping to persuade? Hoping to dissuade? Seeking internet points?
    absolutely. I'm well aware of the "us versus them" attitude we have developed over the years. seen it coming decades ago. now, I should be the last person to criticize either of the major parties, but I do so frequently. we, as citizens, have lost our way over time. we are culpable and even complicit in our neglect. but, that's a different topic. this attitude must come to an end, as the welfare of the citizens is at stake here. as the old saying goes - a house divided cannot stand.
    Thanks from Wonderer and Frecks1710

  9. #39
    Member Claudius the God's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    2,693
    Thanks
    2155

    From
    California
    Quote Originally Posted by kmiller1610 View Post
    Anyone who thinks that a word that symbolizes a large group of different people can be "defined" might want to consider the study of semantics as a sidelight. Political terms are meant to be elastic so that people can listen to their emotions and become committed without knowing exactly what they are committing. That's how politics works. High emotions. Not much depth of thought.

    I am by nature, a contrarian. Many of the people I admire are contrarians. I am very conservative when surrounded by people who have made a religion of their progressive ideals. But I like liberals as my entertainers and many of my friends. I believe in the blending of opinions into communities. But I live on the periphery of such communities because as soon as someone tries to put me in a box, I rebel against the constrictions. The truth of my opposition positioning tells a lot more about me than any political label might.
    While this is a respectable position to take personally, we are a two party nation with clear sides and your vote determines which side you support. If you vote for the GOP, you support their positions and have made a statement that you are fine with their policies and ideology regardless of your personal value system.
    Thanks from NightSwimmer

  10. #40
    Member Claudius the God's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    2,693
    Thanks
    2155

    From
    California
    Quote Originally Posted by Wonderer View Post
    I did that a few months back: What Is It That Makes You Conservative?

    Post #277 sets out my stances but the caveat here is that I'm not necessarily a full-on conservative, but rather a fiscal conservative/social moderate with libertarian leanings. And I think labels are lazy and easily abused.
    I will take a look but as I told another poster, when you vote you make one of two choices, left or right. Your vote enters you into one camp or another camp which means your vote is empowered by that camps political choices and ideologies. You simply cannot maturely say that you vote for one or the other yet ignore huge swathes of that camps ideology or legislation. This fact is why I am so blatantly partisan in support of the Democratic Party.

Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. They Are Saying The Leak Is Stopped
    By Blueneck in forum Current Events
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 16th July 2010, 06:44 PM
  2. This should be stopped!
    By Pragmatist in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 13th August 2009, 10:53 AM
  3. OPPS sorry Should have stopped here first!
    By BeMyOwnBoss in forum New Users
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 25th September 2006, 05:21 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed