Total Posts:8|Showing Posts:1-8
Jump to topic:

You want to know what's sad?

MouthWash
Posts: 2,607
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/28/2012 8:28:21 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Many of the greatest "intellectuals" (economists, meteorologists, quantum physicists, etc) today are less knowledgeable in their fields than hundreds or thousands of inexperienced kids who study those subjects. After all, one theory (Keynesianism, global warming, many-worlds interpretation) has to be right, so the greatest minds in those areas that subscribe to the wrong views are less correct than those students who subscribe to the right view. All because of this little thing called "ideology." Fascinating, isn't it?
"Well, that gives whole new meaning to my assassination. If I was going to die anyway, perhaps I should leave the Bolsheviks' descendants some Christmas cookies instead of breaking their dishes and vodka bottles in their sleep." -Tsar Nicholas II (YYW)
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/28/2012 11:52:42 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Except that all implies infallibilism (that you can only know things that are true). e.g. saying both Plato and Aristotle is smart would be false. Fallibilism 1) is more intuitively correct and 2) more reasonable.

So it's not that sad really :)
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
MouthWash
Posts: 2,607
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/28/2012 11:55:10 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/28/2012 11:52:42 AM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
Except that all implies infallibilism (that you can only know things that are true). e.g. saying both Plato and Aristotle is smart would be false. Fallibilism 1) is more intuitively correct and 2) more reasonable.

So it's not that sad really :)

Plato was smart in some ways, an idiot in others. The Forms? Really?
"Well, that gives whole new meaning to my assassination. If I was going to die anyway, perhaps I should leave the Bolsheviks' descendants some Christmas cookies instead of breaking their dishes and vodka bottles in their sleep." -Tsar Nicholas II (YYW)
jat93
Posts: 1,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/28/2012 12:06:35 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/28/2012 8:28:21 AM, MouthWash wrote:
Many of the greatest "intellectuals" (economists, meteorologists, quantum physicists, etc) today are less knowledgeable in their fields than hundreds or thousands of inexperienced kids who study those subjects. After all, one theory (Keynesianism, global warming, many-worlds interpretation) has to be right, so the greatest minds in those areas that subscribe to the wrong views are less correct than those students who subscribe to the right view. All because of this little thing called "ideology." Fascinating, isn't it?

Ideology is only part of the problem, I think. I think the biggest problem is what creates ideology - the idea that there are some ideas and systems that are objectively true and false aside from that which is true to the individual. That which is true to the individual is the only truth. Ideology (conforming to a given idea or set of ideas as 'the one way of doing things') is constricting. But what is ideology based on? It is based ultimately on authority and popularity. Think about it. Why do we respect and admire and care about the opinions of a published Harvard economist but a young college kid who is passionately immersing himself in the world of Marx, Hayek, Keynes, Smith, Friedman, etc. - his opinion is worthless. Well, because the kid ain't got no degrees, ain't got no (worthless) confirmation from society on some worthless piece of paper signifying that he is supposedly a master of his field. He may well be a master of his field. People tend to underrate the passion, dedication, skepticism, and hunger for truth that is natural for young adults (mid to late teens - mid to late 20s). To me, the economic views of that young college kid who is pouring through the history of economic ideas and proposals and thinkers and policies is JUST as worth listening to as the published Harvard professor with the degrees and the respect and the authority. If not more worth listening to.

Viva la revolution! The youth could conquer the world through their passion and dedication and radicalism and skepticism and disillusionment - if only we believed in ourselves enough to try. If you are reading this and you find yourself in the age group broadly defined as teenager/young adult, give me your name, there's a sign up sheet right over here; together we can take over the world in order to liberate it from itself. Why the fvck are we not staging a second American revolution again? It's time. If anything it's long overdue. And this time let it be led by the disillusioned yet naively hopeful youth, who have been so shafted by those in power.

National debt? FVCK the national debt motherfckers, I did not accumulate that debt, a bunch of powerful rich white men in suits did. They can fight to pay it back. They can die for their debt, their mistakes. But I will not go down with them because of their opulence, their greed, their childishly pressing need for more and more power over society. They want to pursue those goals, fine, but they should reap the consequences. Instead, what happens? They're bailed out. Because the whole system is designed by those in power over the weak and ignorant and powerless, so the powerful will be able to do whatever they want, and they can fck up, and the masses will bail them out whether they are aware of it or not, and the cycle of history continues: the exploiters VS the exploited, the 1% vs the 99%, the all powerful versus the powerless. Fxck that sh!t man, I have had enough of it.

This system, this status quo, this establishment... It bores me. It oppresses me. It represses me. Same is true for all passionately hopeful and yet pitifully disillusioned youth. Well, what are we waiting for, kids? Huh? Oh, what's that, you're too scared to give up the false comfort of your illusion of security in order to live the way you truly want to? Maybe it's all futile anyway, then. Forget about the revolution, I'm going to go watch Spongebob.
MouthWash
Posts: 2,607
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/28/2012 12:41:26 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/28/2012 12:06:35 PM, jat93 wrote:
At 11/28/2012 8:28:21 AM, MouthWash wrote:
Many of the greatest "intellectuals" (economists, meteorologists, quantum physicists, etc) today are less knowledgeable in their fields than hundreds or thousands of inexperienced kids who study those subjects. After all, one theory (Keynesianism, global warming, many-worlds interpretation) has to be right, so the greatest minds in those areas that subscribe to the wrong views are less correct than those students who subscribe to the right view. All because of this little thing called "ideology." Fascinating, isn't it?

Ideology is only part of the problem, I think. I think the biggest problem is what creates ideology - the idea that there are some ideas and systems that are objectively true and false aside from that which is true to the individual. That which is true to the individual is the only truth. Ideology (conforming to a given idea or set of ideas as 'the one way of doing things') is constricting. But what is ideology based on? It is based ultimately on authority and popularity. Think about it. Why do we respect and admire and care about the opinions of a published Harvard economist but a young college kid who is passionately immersing himself in the world of Marx, Hayek, Keynes, Smith, Friedman, etc. - his opinion is worthless. Well, because the kid ain't got no degrees, ain't got no (worthless) confirmation from society on some worthless piece of paper signifying that he is supposedly a master of his field. He may well be a master of his field. People tend to underrate the passion, dedication, skepticism, and hunger for truth that is natural for young adults (mid to late teens - mid to late 20s). To me, the economic views of that young college kid who is pouring through the history of economic ideas and proposals and thinkers and policies is JUST as worth listening to as the published Harvard professor with the degrees and the respect and the authority. If not more worth listening to.

Viva la revolution! The youth could conquer the world through their passion and dedication and radicalism and skepticism and disillusionment - if only we believed in ourselves enough to try. If you are reading this and you find yourself in the age group broadly defined as teenager/young adult, give me your name, there's a sign up sheet right over here; together we can take over the world in order to liberate it from itself. Why the fvck are we not staging a second American revolution again? It's time. If anything it's long overdue. And this time let it be led by the disillusioned yet naively hopeful youth, who have been so shafted by those in power.

National debt? FVCK the national debt motherfckers, I did not accumulate that debt, a bunch of powerful rich white men in suits did. They can fight to pay it back. They can die for their debt, their mistakes. But I will not go down with them because of their opulence, their greed, their childishly pressing need for more and more power over society. They want to pursue those goals, fine, but they should reap the consequences. Instead, what happens? They're bailed out. Because the whole system is designed by those in power over the weak and ignorant and powerless, so the powerful will be able to do whatever they want, and they can fck up, and the masses will bail them out whether they are aware of it or not, and the cycle of history continues: the exploiters VS the exploited, the 1% vs the 99%, the all powerful versus the powerless. Fxck that sh!t man, I have had enough of it.

This system, this status quo, this establishment... It bores me. It oppresses me. It represses me. Same is true for all passionately hopeful and yet pitifully disillusioned youth. Well, what are we waiting for, kids? Huh? Oh, what's that, you're too scared to give up the false comfort of your illusion of security in order to live the way you truly want to? Maybe it's all futile anyway, then. Forget about the revolution, I'm going to go watch Spongebob.

Obama is blameless, obviously.
"Well, that gives whole new meaning to my assassination. If I was going to die anyway, perhaps I should leave the Bolsheviks' descendants some Christmas cookies instead of breaking their dishes and vodka bottles in their sleep." -Tsar Nicholas II (YYW)
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/28/2012 4:33:27 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/28/2012 8:28:21 AM, MouthWash wrote:
Many of the greatest "intellectuals" (economists, meteorologists, quantum physicists, etc) today are less knowledgeable in their fields than hundreds or thousands of inexperienced kids who study those subjects. After all, one theory (Keynesianism, global warming, many-worlds interpretation) has to be right, so the greatest minds in those areas that subscribe to the wrong views are less correct than those students who subscribe to the right view. All because of this little thing called "ideology." Fascinating, isn't it?

How on earth do you arrive at the conclusion that differing ideas about something like quantum physics are ideologically based?

I also don't see how picking the right answer makes someone more "knowledgeable". Do you really think somebody who flips a coin to decide whether or not the "many worlds interpretation" becomes more knopwledgeable than say Stephen Hawking about the subject if the the coin toss gives them the correct answer?
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
MouthWash
Posts: 2,607
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2012 3:36:35 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/28/2012 4:33:27 PM, Sidewalker wrote:
At 11/28/2012 8:28:21 AM, MouthWash wrote:
Many of the greatest "intellectuals" (economists, meteorologists, quantum physicists, etc) today are less knowledgeable in their fields than hundreds or thousands of inexperienced kids who study those subjects. After all, one theory (Keynesianism, global warming, many-worlds interpretation) has to be right, so the greatest minds in those areas that subscribe to the wrong views are less correct than those students who subscribe to the right view. All because of this little thing called "ideology." Fascinating, isn't it?

How on earth do you arrive at the conclusion that differing ideas about something like quantum physics are ideologically based?

I also don't see how picking the right answer makes someone more "knowledgeable". Do you really think somebody who flips a coin to decide whether or not the "many worlds interpretation" becomes more knopwledgeable than say Stephen Hawking about the subject if the the coin toss gives them the correct answer?

Not someone who has no idea what they're talking about, no.

And I think that almost any sort of theory must have some sort of bias for and against it.
"Well, that gives whole new meaning to my assassination. If I was going to die anyway, perhaps I should leave the Bolsheviks' descendants some Christmas cookies instead of breaking their dishes and vodka bottles in their sleep." -Tsar Nicholas II (YYW)
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,713
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/29/2012 6:20:13 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 11/29/2012 3:36:35 AM, MouthWash wrote:
At 11/28/2012 4:33:27 PM, Sidewalker wrote:
At 11/28/2012 8:28:21 AM, MouthWash wrote:
Many of the greatest "intellectuals" (economists, meteorologists, quantum physicists, etc) today are less knowledgeable in their fields than hundreds or thousands of inexperienced kids who study those subjects. After all, one theory (Keynesianism, global warming, many-worlds interpretation) has to be right, so the greatest minds in those areas that subscribe to the wrong views are less correct than those students who subscribe to the right view. All because of this little thing called "ideology." Fascinating, isn't it?

How on earth do you arrive at the conclusion that differing ideas about something like quantum physics are ideologically based?

I also don't see how picking the right answer makes someone more "knowledgeable". Do you really think somebody who flips a coin to decide whether or not the "many worlds interpretation" becomes more knowledgeable than say Stephen Hawking about the subject if the the coin toss gives them the correct answer?

Not someone who has no idea what they're talking about, no.

You are confusing knowledge with correctness, they aren't the same thing by any stretch. Throwing your vote behind a particular theory does nothing to make you knowledgeable about the theory or the field of study. The premise of your OP is completely wrong, the opposite of both your contentions is the case.

And I think that almost any sort of theory must have some sort of bias for and against it.

Perhaps in practice this is true, but it is only when the methods of science are being misapplied. Foundational to science is the fact/value dichotomy, science is objective, outcomes are repeatable by others independent of their ideological values, that's the whole point of the objective methodology. When the fact/value dichotomy is breached, it's no longer science, it's something else.

No doubt science is often pirated for ideological ends, but that isn't real science or logic, there is some other agenda at work, and that agenda has nothing to do with science or the logic of science.
"It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater