I would like to encourage our readers, especially those who comment, to be very careful that they are not 'sock puppets', people who do not in fact hold any original ideas, but who mouth the words that others provide to them, and who hold ideas that are full of holes and fluff.
For example, I thoroughly doubt that our commenter read up on democide (to the extremely limited extent he has read at all) but rather it would appear he was directed to these ideas by the voices in his head that derive from the gun nut echo chamber of pseudo scholarship.
Where legitimate ideas and concepts exist, they are twisted and contorted like a rubber Rubik's cubes until the original legitimate concept has had this done to it, trying to hammer it to fit the pro-gunner's preconceptions. so they can cherry pick a small piece out of the debris context to support a failed argument:
OR, their understanding of the concept someone minimally smarter told them supported their argument is so poor, so distorted, so surreal and intellectually dishonest that it resembles this image more than an actual three dimensional object Rubik's cube:
A word to readers and commenters; it is not sufficient to have read a book once, or part of a book, or to have come across a single web site on the interwebs. To understand information and concepts, you need a solid existing intellectual structure that is a solid framework to which it can be added. That pre-existing framework is clearly lacking along with the required building blocks of logic and critical thinking. A crumbling hole filled "rube's cube" of ignorance (as distinct from the brilliant Rubik's cube) is insufficient.
After watching his clip of Sam and the Truth Snake, but especially in response to his previous post on sock puppets, I'm tempted to add these images as little design feature widgets on this blog.
For example, I thoroughly doubt that our commenter read up on democide (to the extremely limited extent he has read at all) but rather it would appear he was directed to these ideas by the voices in his head that derive from the gun nut echo chamber of pseudo scholarship.
Where legitimate ideas and concepts exist, they are twisted and contorted like a rubber Rubik's cubes until the original legitimate concept has had this done to it, trying to hammer it to fit the pro-gunner's preconceptions. so they can cherry pick a small piece out of the debris context to support a failed argument:
 |
| how to solve a rubik's cube in 6 seconds |
A word to readers and commenters; it is not sufficient to have read a book once, or part of a book, or to have come across a single web site on the interwebs. To understand information and concepts, you need a solid existing intellectual structure that is a solid framework to which it can be added. That pre-existing framework is clearly lacking along with the required building blocks of logic and critical thinking. A crumbling hole filled "rube's cube" of ignorance (as distinct from the brilliant Rubik's cube) is insufficient.
After watching his clip of Sam and the Truth Snake, but especially in response to his previous post on sock puppets, I'm tempted to add these images as little design feature widgets on this blog.
 |
| Don't feed the Sock Puppets |
So someone's thoughts, ideas, concerns, and viewpoints are not relevant unless they hold multiple advanced degrees and have invested dozens of additional hours on research of any specific topic at hand? I don't know why your attitude surprises me.
ReplyDeleteBut again I want to thank you for giving us a glimpse of the extent of your elitism. It is immensely helpful.
Don't be silly Crunchy.
DeleteThere are plenty of people who are not expert in subjects with advanced degrees. But they have the general well-rounded education not to be gullible about things like why the Japanese didn't invade mainland U.S.
You hold some really foolish views. Anyone with a diploma from a good high school should know better than that. Your other ideas are not much better.
When you try to argue, using concepts you don't really understand, like democide, and you use them to people who ARE better educated in those topics than you are, you make yourself look doubly foolish.
I have an excellent grasp of anatomy, human and comparative. But I still would not try to tell a trained surgeon how to do an apendectomy. I respect the greater specialized expertise of someone who DOES have an advanced degree in a topic.
The reason your ideas don't get traction around here is that they are ill-considered and ill-founded in fact. You do not make sound arguments. I made more sound argumentation when I was in elementary school, so cut the crap about elitism.
It is a feeble attempt to take yourself off the hook for your own failings of knowing stuff and being capable of critical thinking.
Expecting people who comment to actually KNOW what they are talking about is reasonable.
So shape up, learn something, and be reasonable.
Has nothing whatsoever to do with 'elitism'. You have incredibly poor sources of information, the sources you rely on have failed you, UTTERLY. Change sources and don't be afraid to do a little of what the late great sci-fi author Robert Heinlein called 'skull sweat'.
Otherwise, we quite appropriately will not take what you say seriously, and will poke those comments with a sharp stick.
Look, Crunchy, there may very well be a subject on which you know more than I do, an area of expertise I lack. I have no problem learning from you if that area ever comes up here. But I do have the intellectual infrastructure of a very good well rounded education, which allows me to be a quick study. I've been reading at college level since I was in elementary school, and I read very very fast with high comprehension. I haven't found anything yet that I cannot learn if I apply myself - I work at it. Don't be so damned intellectually lazy.
Crunchy, to try and sum up what dog gone said in terms you might understand:
DeleteYou don't need an advanced degree, but you sure as hell need to know what you are talking about and be able to show you understand what's going on.
I would like to think that you were intelligent enough to know when someone is bullshitting you or telling the truth, but I seriously doubt you have that ability.
Some people can talk fancy, but they are twits.
While others can talk plainly and be very wise.