US Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords Shot, Six Die

[Sasaki Kojiro]

The original point of contention that this discussion came about was Fragony rejecting all the sources that claimed that Nazism was right wing with a good dose of leftist economic policy mixed in. My original point which I don't think has been refuted is that the overall collective narrative of academia is for the most part impartial, unbiased and much more accurate and reliable then your own intuition.

I haven't refuted it, I've just said it isn't important.

Have you read louis's threads where he criticizes the standard, textbook explanation of the causes of the 2nd world war? What use is it responding to him with "the overall collective narrative...etc". People criticize the collective narrative in all manner of ways, and those criticisms should be judged on their own merits. This isn't some life or death game where we have 5 seconds to push a button corresponding to the right answer. If all you know about a question is what the academic consensus is, then you don't know the answer to it.


I think their knowledge makes them trustworthy on bring up the facts of the subject. Of course, it is a good thing we live in the information age to check whether their interpretations are correct. I have to ask you where that quote comes from because if it came from a book he wrote then it is quite obvious that you would go into the book knowing that it is going to be his view of the facts. I really doubt you found that statement from a textbook did you?

Peer reviewed article. Textbooks commonly abridge and summarize badly and include wrong information.


The problem of determining your own filter is that peoples filters imo, are worse than taking a PhD's word at face value. I might be wrong, but I have seen no evidence that suggests the public is better at gathering information for themselves then when someone sits in front of the tv or microphone and tells them what the latest findings are and what they might mean.

This isn't a problem. The less you know, the more open your filter should be. Most people would be better suited to examining their own biases than watching out for the bias of the author it's true. But we're better than that.


In regards to how do I know expertise is possible? I am just going by the definition of expert. Someone who basic knows their stuff to a very high degree. When dealing with academic subjects, it's just likely that those who have been award high degrees for their pursuit of such knowledge would in fact, know there stuff to a high degree.

There are some historical periods where there are very few sources to go off of. Are there any experts on those periods? Are there any experts on happiness, truly? Or consciousness? Or curing aids? Or on making advanced weather predictions, or advanced stock market predictions?

You can know more than anyone else about a subject, and be more adept than anyone else at a skill, and still suck.

****************

If you read a book or article written by someone on a topic, they won't just make a claim. They will be making an argument and they will be trying to explain why it is correct. THAT requires much much more skill than judging the finished product. Compare composing a song or writing a book with reviewing it. And anyone with a grasp of reasoning can judge that argument.

edit: I don't know why my posts turn out this long. Anyway, there are easy concepts and subjects that don't require expertise. The stuff that is hard enough to require it is HARD--and doesn't become easy for someone just because they are educated. It is possible that it is beyond our capability as humans. It is certainly possible that our attempts at solving it can come up short. An expert economists belief about what will happen to the stock market may be the equivalent of a weathermans belief about what the weather will be like 2 weeks from now--and he may not know it. Education doesn't always lead to humility, quite the opposite. Skepticism is very important, especially since we build on top of our beliefs throughout our lives. So accepting a phd's best guess because you can't make a better one is terrible.

[Tellos Athenaios]

@TA, I'm quite familiar with political theory, but I just don't buy them. Doesn't mean I don't understand them. Got a few theories on that btw

I know you are. I was pointing out that “common sense” evaluations of expert opinions are going to differ quite heavily according to taste more than merit of the actual opinion: I used you specifically in the example because I know you have a taste for Apple products (revolutionary&magical) which I do not share.

[a completely inoffensive name]

you don't suffer from confirmation bias, and your view is thus pure and untainted? how nice for you, lol!

I constantly recognize my confirmation bias and I challenge it every day.

Do you even know why I am here, using my free time to talk to all of you? It's not because I am a masochist. I am trying to improve myself and get closer to the truth by seeking out people with different views than me and getting into arguments with them. I am putting my ignorance and my ideas out here to be ripped apart so that I might be better and more knowledgeable than everyone over time. Look at the thread where rory kindly pointed out I knew nothing about the relationship between the government and the pharma industry, you know what I did? I acknowledged my ignorance and asked him to inform me about it.

EDIT: If I knew anybody genuinely interested in politics in RL I wouldn't be on here as much.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Oh im sorry you decided to adhere to marxism for a few weeks so your an expert on communism you decided you were a conservative for a year and therefore you are the worlds premier expert on conservatism. This all prevents you from being the archetypal liberal who knows whats best for all of us. Furthermore your obviously an upstanding young man who doesnt have an ounce of bias in his body.

Excuse me while i go barf.

And yeah i know what im talking about. UNIVERSITY IS NOT REAL LIFE. GET OVER IT. Dorm life and even living off campus is not how life is when your out of university. Your saddled with debt unless your rich? yeah not always buddy watch your step.

want a list of liberal hate speech.

Obama
Frances Fox Piven
Richard Kirsch
roland martin
Norman Leboon
"Rev." Jeremiah Wright
Charles Barron
Michael Feingold
Spike Lee
Howard Dean
John Kerry
PETA
Farrakhan
Randi Rhodes

.........

oh an by the by theres supposedly a 2-1 difference between republicans and democrats at the university of arizona. really even environment your right.

It wasn't really a few weeks, is was more like 8-10 months. Not that much better, but I did learn a lot about the philosophy during that brief time. I am not saying I know better than him I am simply trying to strive for the objective truth here and Furn was giving me his perspective on the matter. My point I was trying to make was simply that I have always attempted to purposely go out of my way to learn as much as possible from the exact opposite side of the political spectrum. I once was a neocon who felt we needed to get rid of the liberals who want to take away our freedoms and protect the homeland. Then I got schooled by someone who knew better then me and I learned from him. Then I became a angst filled anti-capitalist teenager who wanted greed abolished from Earth. Then I got schooled by someone who knew better then me and I learned from him, etc. Fast forward 3 years and now I am a gun loving, left leaning moderate who wants to try and establish a solid foundation of public support projects while keeping the integrity of the free market in place. Now I am here getting schooled by Sasaki and everyone else here and I will learn from this. That's all I am saying. I do have a bias, I just try my best to leave it at the door so to speak when I try to make a point. Too often I simply see people who make a decision on how they want to see the world and the hold onto it for their entire life. It makes me pessimistic and frustrated.

I don't see how university is not real life. I have to get a job or go broke and become a failure. How is this not the driving motivating factor of life? To be fair, many people have their parents buy most of the stuff for them, but for many people it isn't that case.

I hope you don't think I harbor any real anger at you because you seem to be very angry right back at me. I'm sorry if I was a bit of a **** at you in my last reply.

I looked at your list and see some problems with it, however I want to see if you still have a solid point. If you could kindly give me links to something hate filled that Obama and a couple other of those people have said that would be great. This might be my bias, but I can't think of a single thing obama has said that is hate filled.

EDIT: I don't recall saying that conservatives had a majority at University of Arizona, only that they have a large proportion. 1 in 3 is a big proportion and and I am just saying I don't think you can say uni's are inherently liberal training institutions if 33% manage to self identify as conservatives in some of them.

[a completely inoffensive name]

I haven't refuted it, I've just said it isn't important.

Have you read louis's threads where he criticizes the standard, textbook explanation of the causes of the 2nd world war? What use is it responding to him with "the overall collective narrative...etc". People criticize the collective narrative in all manner of ways, and those criticisms should be judged on their own merits. This isn't some life or death game where we have 5 seconds to push a button corresponding to the right answer. If all you know about a question is what the academic consensus is, then you don't know the answer to it.



Peer reviewed article. Textbooks commonly abridge and summarize badly and include wrong information.



This isn't a problem. The less you know, the more open your filter should be. Most people would be better suited to examining their own biases than watching out for the bias of the author it's true. But we're better than that.



There are some historical periods where there are very few sources to go off of. Are there any experts on those periods? Are there any experts on happiness, truly? Or consciousness? Or curing aids? Or on making advanced weather predictions, or advanced stock market predictions?

You can know more than anyone else about a subject, and be more adept than anyone else at a skill, and still suck.

****************

If you read a book or article written by someone on a topic, they won't just make a claim. They will be making an argument and they will be trying to explain why it is correct. THAT requires much much more skill than judging the finished product. Compare composing a song or writing a book with reviewing it. And anyone with a grasp of reasoning can judge that argument.

edit: I don't know why my posts turn out this long. Anyway, there are easy concepts and subjects that don't require expertise. The stuff that is hard enough to require it is HARD--and doesn't become easy for someone just because they are educated. It is possible that it is beyond our capability as humans. It is certainly possible that our attempts at solving it can come up short. An expert economists belief about what will happen to the stock market may be the equivalent of a weathermans belief about what the weather will be like 2 weeks from now--and he may not know it. Education doesn't always lead to humility, quite the opposite. Skepticism is very important, especially since we build on top of our beliefs throughout our lives. So accepting a phd's best guess because you can't make a better one is terrible.

I have read this like 6 times and I still don't have a good reply to it. I think I will have to concede here. I haven't seen Louis's posts about the causes of WW2, I don't recall a thread about that, what was the name of the thread?

[Centurion1]

t wasn't really a few weeks, is was more like 8-10 months. Not that much better, but I did learn a lot about the philosophy during that brief time. I am not saying I know better than him I am simply trying to strive for the objective truth here and Furn was giving me his perspective on the matter. My point I was trying to make was simply that I have always attempted to purposely go out of my way to learn as much as possible from the exact opposite side of the political spectrum. I once was a neocon who felt we needed to get rid of the liberals who want to take away our freedoms and protect the homeland. Then I got schooled by someone who knew better then me and I learned from him. Then I became a angst filled anti-capitalist teenager who wanted greed abolished from Earth. Then I got schooled by someone who knew better then me and I learned from him, etc. Fast forward 3 years and now I am a gun loving, left leaning moderate who wants to try and establish a solid foundation of public support projects while keeping the integrity of the free market in place. Now I am here getting schooled by Sasaki and everyone else here and I will learn from this. That's all I am saying. I do have a bias, I just try my best to leave it at the door so to speak when I try to make a point. Too often I simply see people who make a decision on how they want to see the world and the hold onto it for their entire life. It makes me pessimistic and frustrated.

I don't see how university is not real life. I have to get a job or go broke and become a failure. How is this not the driving motivating factor of life? To be fair, many people have their parents buy most of the stuff for them, but for many people it isn't that case.

I hope you don't think I harbor any real anger at you because you seem to be very angry right back at me. I'm sorry if I was a bit of a **** at you in my last reply.

I looked at your list and see some problems with it, however I want to see if you still have a solid point. If you could kindly give me links to something hate filled that Obama and a couple other of those people have said that would be great. This might be my bias, but I can't think of a single thing obama has said that is hate filled.

EDIT: I don't recall saying that conservatives had a majority at University of Arizona, only that they have a large proportion. 1 in 3 is a big proportion and and I am just saying I don't think you can say uni's are inherently liberal training institutions if 33% manage to self identify as conservatives in some of them.

The institution is liberal even if the populace is not. Now find me a number on the percentage of liberal professors.

As to something hateful Obama said. yeah it was more of a flippant addition because premier politicians usually know better and let their underlings have hateful speech but i found the bibles guns and antipathy comment quite ignorant and hateful. Sure he wasnt saying anything like break their kneecaps but it was nonetheless hateful in its own way.

and what other names do you have trouble with because trust me they have hate speech.


EDIT: ACIN i believe it was the treaty of versailles thread.

[Reenk Roink]

There are some historical periods where there are very few sources to go off of. Are there any experts on those periods? Are there any experts on happiness, truly? Or consciousness? Or curing aids? Or on making advanced weather predictions, or advanced stock market predictions?

You can know more than anyone else about a subject, and be more adept than anyone else at a skill, and still suck.

****************

If you read a book or article written by someone on a topic, they won't just make a claim. They will be making an argument and they will be trying to explain why it is correct. THAT requires much much more skill than judging the finished product. Compare composing a song or writing a book with reviewing it. And anyone with a grasp of reasoning can judge that argument.

edit: I don't know why my posts turn out this long. Anyway, there are easy concepts and subjects that don't require expertise. The stuff that is hard enough to require it is HARD--and doesn't become easy for someone just because they are educated. It is possible that it is beyond our capability as humans. It is certainly possible that our attempts at solving it can come up short. An expert economists belief about what will happen to the stock market may be the equivalent of a weathermans belief about what the weather will be like 2 weeks from now--and he may not know it. Education doesn't always lead to humility, quite the opposite. Skepticism is very important, especially since we build on top of our beliefs throughout our lives. So accepting a phd's best guess because you can't make a better one is terrible.

Your point about uncritical acceptance of PHD's from the high academy is definitely a good one, and there are few things more frustrating than dealing with that from someone in a discussion. For example, the citing of Cambpell (although many are even unaware WHO they are citing when they cite this) when discussing the similarities of the virgin birth of Mithras and that of Christ. Campbell is definitely an authority, probably still THE authority, but perhaps one can go back and see his argument and interpretation of the story of Mithras and see that calling it a virgin birth seems quite... arguable to say the least. Uncritical acceptance is only left for religious authority figures, for instance, the Pope and other authorities within the Holy Church. Nobody else is deserving (except Mom of course).

But at the same time, it must be noted as it seems to be getting lost from the point you are making, that many academic experts are certainly upfront with the limitations of their work. I've especially seen this in history, which contrasts with the co-opting of history for political purposes which is quite widespread, especially outside of academia. So you have various experts, pointing out in their prefaces quite clearly, that this locality and time period does not have a wealth of remaining evidence and the conclusions are based on certain models and reconstructions, which of course may well be totally wrong. Sure the rest of the work clearly assumes whatever was stated earlier and makes no mention of it, but academic works tend to run on as is, so that is perfectly acceptable. And of course, novelty is valued highly in western academia, so the inferences in many works tend to be a bit more liberal. Still, most scholars seem to have an idea that despite their studies being incomplete and biased in many ways, there is some benefit with continuing on. As well as the fact that ALL human intellectual endeavors can be characterized with the same deficiencies.

These people are not called experts because they have actually mastered all that there is to know in their field. They are called experts because they know somewhere near as much as a person can know within the particulars of their field at the current time.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

I agree, an upfront acknowledgment of the limitations of their work and spending time perhaps discussing the criticisms of it are two of the biggest things I look for. Or at least, that general honest attitude.

[Louis VI the Fat]

I agree, an upfront acknowledgment of the limitations of their work and spending time perhaps discussing the criticisms of it are two of the biggest things I look for. Or at least, that general honest attitude.THATS GAY YOUR A HOMOSEXAUL THE TWO BIGGEST THINGS I LOOK FOR ARE SOMETHING ELSE YES SIREE....





Edit: I'll go get my medication its wearing off I see...

Edit2: But first I'm going to perform my moderator duties in the Monastery.:grin:

[Crazed Rabbit]

Another 'cause' for the shooting; not guns or speeches, but pot! (http://www.frumforum.com/did-pot-trigger-giffords-shooting)


After horrific shootings, we hear calls for stricter regulation of guns. The Tucson shooting should remind us why we regulate marijuana.

Jared Lee Loughner, the man held as the Tucson shooter, has been described by those who know as a “pot smoking loner.”

He had two encounters with the law, one for possession of drug paraphanalia.

We are also learning that Loughner exhibited signs of severe mental illness, very likely schizophrenia.

The connection between marijuana and schizophrenia is both controversial and complicated.

CR

[Megas Methuselah]

Lots of hate. Don`t hate.

[PanzerJaeger]

I lost interest in this thread about two pages ago when it succumbed to Godwin so forgive me if this has already been posted, but here is a new video shot by the killer. (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-arizona-shooting-20110115,0,6932026.story)

[Louis VI the Fat]

I lost interest in this thread about two pages ago when it succumbed to Godwin so forgive me if this has already been posted, but here is a new video shot by the killer. (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-arizona-shooting-20110115,0,6932026.story)Disturbing. I see what that fellow student of his meant when she said that she would sit close to the door, bag in hand, ready to make a run for it, whenever she shared a class with this guy.


I wonder...
If there had been a sustained agressive campaign against teachers, their takeover of America, the 'unconstitutionality' of schools - would Jared Lee Loughner have gone on a college rampage?Another Virginia Tech?



Also, I see people like this all of the time, which is a frightening thought. Brrr...

Their ramblings, so confusing to me, but making perfect sense to them. Never do they accept or understand that their ramblings are not understood by other people.
That sense of knowing more than others, of seeing through the system, of intellectual superiority, not mitigated by any sense of realistic assesment. Their conspirational thinking. Their contempt, their looking down on others. Their despise, anger at all who are part of the conspiracy.

They keep themselves in check with some revenge thought: they 'will go to the papers and then once the truth is out - oh boy!'. Or they harbour violent fantasies. They are ticking bombs.

[Fragony]

Another 'cause' for the shooting; not guns or speeches, but pot! (http://www.frumforum.com/did-pot-trigger-giffords-shooting)



CR

Well at least it will be absolutely unthinkable that this story gets any more attention in teh quality press here at least, various knowledgionists must feel kinda stupid banging that drum

ps Palin is still guilty of inciting violence, among others

[Furunculus]

I constantly recognize my confirmation bias and I challenge it every day.

Do you even know why I am here, using my free time to talk to all of you? It's not because I am a masochist. I am trying to improve myself and get closer to the truth by seeking out people with different views than me and getting into arguments with them. I am putting my ignorance and my ideas out here to be ripped apart so that I might be better and more knowledgeable than everyone over time. Look at the thread where rory kindly pointed out I knew nothing about the relationship between the government and the pharma industry, you know what I did? I acknowledged my ignorance and asked him to inform me about it.

EDIT: If I knew anybody genuinely interested in politics in RL I wouldn't be on here as much.
while that is very touching, and agreeable as a personality trait, what is not so agreeable is that you do not even consider the fact that others in this forum might be doing exactly that same thing.

[HoreTore]

others in this forum might be doing exactly that same thing.

*raises hand*

[Furunculus]

permission to speak in class................

[a completely inoffensive name]

while that is very touching, and agreeable as a personality trait, what is not so agreeable is that you do not even consider the fact that others in this forum might be doing exactly that same thing.

It is true I never did, I apologize for not taking that into consideration.

[Furunculus]

apology accepted, i too come to this forum precisely because i am challenged by viewpoints moulded in very different environmental settings.