volkris @volkris@qoto.org
I think the most pressing and fundamental problem of the day is that people lack a practically effective means of sorting out questions of fact in the larger world. We can hardly begin to discuss ways of addressing reality if we can't agree what reality even is, after all.
The institutions that have served this role in the past have dropped the ball, so the next best solution is talking to each other, particularly to those who disagree, to sort out conflicting claims.
Unfortunately, far too many actively oppose this, leaving all opposing claims untested. It's very regressive.
So that's my hobby, striving to understanding the arguments of all sides at least because it's interesting to see how mythologies are formed but also because maybe through that process we can all have our beliefs tested.
But if nothing else, social media platforms like this are chances to vent frustrations that on so many issues both sides are obviously wrong ;)
Joined Dec 2022
You know what's not a great argument to tell somebody who is noticing that they are being gaslit?
"You are not being gaslit."
Yeah, that doesn't really help, to be honest :)
Again, if you think this is about slavery apologetics then you really don't understand what's going on, as reported by fairly widely accepted members of the press not to mention primary sources like the officials themselves in the public record.
Simply saying this is not a straw man argument doesn't actually make it not a straw man argument.
Keep in mind that I would be on equal ground of asking you the exact same questions.
Are you really such a wilting flower that your ego cannot tolerate the embarrassment of finding out you were wrong, as proven by the sources cited here, do you really believe that children are such delicate snowflakes that they must be protected from learning what really happened instead of your own narrative that it clearly refuted by the record?
The problem is that citations presented often disprove the claims being made. So the claims seem flat out factually wrong.
If a person wants to make a heated argument against something, it's a really good first step to first prove the thing that they are arguing against actually exists.
Again this is where the straw man argument comes up.
People notice when an argument is being made that just doesn't really address the reality they've seen.
It comes across as gas lighting at that point.
What other suspect parts were there?
If you're talking about your question about how I would describe various race riots, well if I had to give a pretty short and simple description, it would be people rising up to try to escape injustices of society.
I wouldn't generally want to cast various events into one single bucket since each one had their different nuances, different matches to light the fire, but if you want a summary description that might be my quick take.
Why in the world do you want to make people feel bad about themselves? That's bizarre, sounds flat out sociopathological, that you have a goal of making children feel bad about themselves, or at least, you are disappointed that the state is not making children feel bad about themselves.
I mean wow.
YES, and the curriculum does teach that.
Like, you're on their side. You're in agreement with them. They work to teach those horrors.
You are in agreement.
Huh. You've misunderstood my position, and really if you so misunderstand my position it makes me suspect that you've misunderstood so many others' as well.
The problem is that what they came up with is so empty that it ended up being the dopamine hit that it could have been in he beginning.
They had to pare back charges to the point of having precious little left.
Trump is to be defeated in the court of public opinion. All of this legal stuff is trying to skip the messy task of talking to other voters and informing them, and instead trying to short circuit the democratic process with a questionable legal process.
It didn't work.
I would propose the alternative of actually talking to voters and showing them that the reasons they support the guy are wrong, that he failed on so many of his promises, and simply defeating him on account of his being a loser and failure at the job.
All of this legal nonsense only supports him when there is such a better direction that calls out Trump for being a failure, that nobody should really be behind.
Well, why not? Because that seems to be what happened.
Once Congress, lead by the VP, accepted the EC votes the effort hit a dead end.
Have you had many conversations with MAGA voters?
But the #SCOTUS is not *supposed* to care.
The whole point of having an independent judiciary is for it to be beyond the opinions and wishes of the masses, for it to actually tell the general public "no" when they want something that runs counter to the rule of law, to the rights of the people.
But mainly, there is so much misinformation about the #SupremeCourt going around that it's largely meaningless.
They should ignore these polls, and fortunately for checks and balances they are insulated from them.
Who is arguing that a huge evil is actually good?
volkris
boosted
It's about time science proves something useful.
https://patreon.com/lowqualityfacts
Well that's a pretty naive take on things, and arguably exactly the sort of position that this curriculum helps guard against.
If this education helps students realize that things can be bad overall even though there are minor, individualized benefits against the overall negative, then that's a net gain of education.
I'm sorry you seem to have missed out on that realization, but let's hope the students down in Florida are educated with a broader perspective on the world than you've come across.
Because maybe we want students of history to know more about nuances of the world, beyond the simple, often politicized black and white narratives that are as convenient for politicians as they are misleading?
Maybe it's so important that in the education system we let students know what actually happened?
What's *so important* about that? Well, honestly that seems self-evident to me as a proponent of liberal education.
Well no. Just because one receives a benefit doesn't mean it's overall for the best. There are examples all throughout life where a person benefits from one thing even though it is on the whole for the worse.
It is entirely reasonable to say that slavery is bad even though there were some minor benefits to individuals in the course of that overall terrible institution.
The two statements are not mutually exclusive, and it's apparently very worthwhile for our education system to point that out, since so many people on here seem to overlook that.
I think the most pressing and fundamental problem of the day is that people lack a practically effective means of sorting out questions of fact in the larger world. We can hardly begin to discuss ways of addressing reality if we can't agree what reality even is, after all.
The institutions that have served this role in the past have dropped the ball, so the next best solution is talking to each other, particularly to those who disagree, to sort out conflicting claims.
Unfortunately, far too many actively oppose this, leaving all opposing claims untested. It's very regressive.
So that's my hobby, striving to understanding the arguments of all sides at least because it's interesting to see how mythologies are formed but also because maybe through that process we can all have our beliefs tested.
But if nothing else, social media platforms like this are chances to vent frustrations that on so many issues both sides are obviously wrong ;)
Joined Dec 2022
volkris's choices:
