not only on this board but in society period now
with the explosion of social media in the past decade discourse has taken a nose dive
fallacy is common place
there is no more acknowledgment of the whole spectrum of a conversation just the persons biased point of view
hope that google AI doesnt take over

there's no incentive for it to go away either unless u believe human nature is good-natured

there is too much to exploit when people attach to movements and agendas rather than truly practicing critical thinking

it's so much easier to profit from division

anti-intellectualism is a huge part of the American fabric...

it's hard to tell the understandably ignorant, from the willfully ignorant, from the crazies nowadays

its out of control
productive conversation is not the goal anymore
being right is the ultimate
and thats is a false sense of accomplishment

>productive conversation is not the goal anymore
>being right is the ultimate

i suspect msg boards like this and SM platforms have allowed ppl who would normally never converse to engage in conversation. it can result in ppl who will not ever move each other or change each other's minds engaging each other in conversation.

i definitely engage in the attempt to be right vs. productive conversation - but not always. i do it when i know the person w/whom i'm conversing is a 'lost cause'. when i know that we will not ever agree on the topic at hand i can become more interested in showing them up than convincing them, let alone hearing from them. plus many times in these instances i'm posting for the lurkers and not the actual person on the other side of the conversation. i want to show up the other person to influence the lurkers who may agree w/that person. still, that's cheap and i know it - i usually only go there when i feel the conversation has hit an impasse.

point to track record.

Politicians have been for years saying one thing in public and something totally different in private. At least now, cameras are rolling and the private becomes public. I strongly believe Mitt Romney is not president because someone recorded him making that 47% remark.

Daily Show and mediate and have created entire businesses showing out the inconsistencies and hypocrisy of public figures.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson


"One of the most important things in life is what Judge Learned Hand described as 'that ever-gnawing inner doubt as to whether you're

i feel like when those in power are at crises they promote it...and any other time they don't

i remember in my childhood, there was a huge PUSH for critical thinking in education that fizzles out as they try and failed to quantify it

i dunno

goes in and out of style.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson


"One of the most important things in life is what Judge Learned Hand described as 'that ever-gnawing inner doubt as to whether you're

People like to take the shortest route for conversation. There is a lack of actually spending time with someone to get to know them and yet somehow we have been duped into thinking that we are friends. It takes effort to build a relationship and a community, but Social Media lied and told us that we didn't need to take serious time and tat anyone can be in our community, act a fool, be disrespectful and that we are supposed to take it and like it.


.
.
.
"Romans 10 : 9 says, "If you declare
with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,”
and believe in your heart that
God raised him from the dead,
you will be saved."

i dont have to have any intimate or surface relationship with a person so have an honest discussion
we need both parties to be willing to show commitment to critical thinking and be willing to acknowledge their biases and assumptions
acknowledge conflicting views to your own arguments
and most importantly admit when you wrong and move on from that and be willing to learn

>i dont have to have any intimate or surface relationship with
>a person so have an honest discussion
>we need both parties to be willing to show commitment to
>critical thinking and be willing to acknowledge their biases
>and assumptions
>acknowledge conflicting views to your own arguments
>and most importantly admit when you wrong and move on from
>that and be willing to learn


No matter if you call it relationship and I call it a community, it's still the same premise. People need to have better and more authentic conversation with each other despite the trappings of Socail Media.





.
.
.
"Romans 10 : 9 says, "If you declare
with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,”
and believe in your heart that
God raised him from the dead,
you will be saved."

but this conversation is about honesty in conversation
wherever that conversation happens
the medium does not matter to a degree becuase those being dishonest would do it without or with access to the internet

does impact honesty...but that's the extent of the relevance i guess

i tend to think the medium doesnt influence the thought just how its communicated

>i tend to think the medium doesnt influence the thought just
>how its communicated

sometimes...trolls for instance rarely troll in real life...

SM is often about attention seeking...dishonesty is a huge part of that and so it definitely helps to "promote" behavior that otherwise might not be considered

it's basically added social capital to dishonesty that doesn't present itself so conveniently IRL

But you told me that my intro response regarding the impact of SM was not relevant. How does that work?

.
.
.
"Romans 10 : 9 says, "If you declare
with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,”
and believe in your heart that
God raised him from the dead,
you will be saved."

ric's comment included actual points to show the connection that could be discussed while your response was telling tom he couldn't see the connection without providing the connection for him to see and reevaluate his position

i even acknowledged case had valid points
then Ric connected the points to the topic at hand in a way that made me think

>but this conversation is about honesty in conversation
>wherever that conversation happens
>the medium does not matter to a degree becuase those being
>dishonest would do it without or with access to the internet
>

And I mentioned the medium of SM because you made a factor in your OP. But we're cool.





.
.
.
"Romans 10 : 9 says, "If you declare
with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,”
and believe in your heart that
God raised him from the dead,
you will be saved."

college campuses being the biggest example

more and more feelings are being put before knowledge

Identity politics trump content.

Feelings trump discourse.

Wit trumps critical thinking.

I think social media has played a part in why campus's have changed this way though.

When equality trumps freedom.

But this thread is full of men who I'm sure fancy themselves the creme de la creme of engaging conversations, exhibiting the utmost intellectual honesty during discourse, so we gon see lol.

be mad all you want, by you intellectual integrity depends upon whether or not you're willing to admit it.

**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson


"One of the most important things in life is what Judge Learned Hand described as 'that ever-gnawing inner doubt as to whether you're

climate change a problem? balderdash!
-crusty conservative

>not only on this board but in society period now
>with the explosion of social media in the past decade
>discourse has taken a nose dive
>fallacy is common place
>there is no more acknowledgment of the whole spectrum of a
>conversation just the persons biased point of view
>hope that google AI doesnt take over

people don't understand their conditioning
they think they are "looking at both sides"
but when they again and again fail to see their blind spots


its you
not the person who actually sees what you miss
consistently
~~~~
When you are born, you cry, and the world rejoices. Live so that when you die, you rejoice, and the world cries.
~~~~
You cannot hate people for their own good.

Honestly, it's on my dating criteria - you can't have a relationship, who can't even tell the truth to themselves, let alone you.

>not only on this board but in society period now

There have always been stupid people. There were arguably far more stupid people before the internet than there are now, they just didn't have a platform. Now they have a platform, and it's up to the smart people to weed out their substance-lacking thoughts.

But this is how it's always been and how it always will be. Takes all kinds.

http://www.vox.com/2015/6/3/8706323/college-professor-afraid

of course this had to be followed up with:
http://www.vox.com/2015/6/5/8736591/liberal-professor-identity

"In fact, a closer read of the article shows that the actual problem the professor faces isn't the rise of a scary new breed of students. Students, after all, have been complaining about their professors and just about everything else since time immemorial.

Rather, if university faculty are feeling disempowered in their classrooms, that's because they do, in fact, have less power at work: the shrinking pool of tenure-track jobs and the corresponding rise in the numbers of poorly paid adjuncts means many university teachers are in a precarious position right now."

cause it's interesting:

"As Matt Yglesias wrote in January, the term "identity politics" is generally used to refer to feminist or anti-racist critiques, but that assumes that traditionally marginalized groups are the only people with an "identity."

The implication of this usage," Yglesias wrote, "is that somehow an identity is something only women or African Americans or perhaps LGBT people have. White men just have ideas about politics that spring from a realm of pure reason, with concerns that are by definition universal."

That's the real counter to the argument being made about identity politics. And I think it's valid in some cases. Hemingway and Shakespeare are 'universal'......queer theory is not. A gay person devoting 2 years to a thesis concerning a particular corner of gender theory is seen as isolating themselves in identity politic dogma. Whereas a straight male writing about Hemingway is taking part in the great tradition of literature.

I find identity politics problematic in the current academic climate....but I do concede this point. My response though....is that NOONE should isolate themselves. The tea party is guilty of identity politics too. I would make that argument more often if I cared about the tea party....but I don't. I do, however, care about the state of the left. And what I see is a form of tribalism arising from identity politics. Don't talk about rape if you haven't been raped. Don't talk about racism if you are not a minority. Don't come to our diversity group if you are a white male. And this is being done amongst like-minded people.

Liberals hate conservatives more than they hate black people.

Back on The Daily Show.

Rarely seen the other side made to see the fallacy of their argument so clearly, evev halfway acknowledge it, and still dismiss it.

btw *hugs*

you are one of the most consistently clear eyed individuals on here
and i appreciate it

~~~~
When you are born, you cry, and the world rejoices. Live so that when you die, you rejoice, and the world cries.
~~~~
You cannot hate people for their own good.