Total Posts:46|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

People don't think for themselves

DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2012 4:13:19 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I find it really annoying how people no longer think for themselves.

When it comes to legislation, or executive orders they rather quote some blog run by some layman with no more expertise then themselves. Rather that or they quote a politician, or news station.
People don't take the time to read for themselves, and they believe what ever the middle man tells them.

When it comes to the constitutionality of something, people prefer to quote a blog or supreme court justice, rather than read the constitution themselves. The supreme court rulings are only relevant to court cases, and can only be enforced by lower courts. They have no relevance in a private conversation regarding opinions, unless one is referring to a currently open court case.

If you ask me, if an opinion is not your own, you should not claim it as your own. Unless of course you are a mindless zombie.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2012 4:30:54 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Our values and our morals most certainly aren't our own. Seeing as how opinions are hopelessly linked to those, why SHOULD opinions be original?

What SHOULD be original, or at least, give off the illusion or originality, are the arguments for and against things.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2012 5:04:22 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
You're complaining of something you're 99.99% likely guilty of yourself,...like the rest of the world. Your opinions are not your own, english is not yours, the ideology of Libertarianism is not yours. You derive your positions from others. That's how we learn
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2012 5:07:24 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/6/2012 4:13:19 PM, DanT wrote:
I find it really annoying how people no longer think for themselves.

When it comes to legislation, or executive orders they rather quote some blog run by some layman with no more expertise then themselves. Rather that or they quote a politician, or news station.
People don't take the time to read for themselves, and they believe what ever the middle man tells them.

When it comes to the constitutionality of something, people prefer to quote a blog or supreme court justice, rather than read the constitution themselves. The supreme court rulings are only relevant to court cases, and can only be enforced by lower courts. They have no relevance in a private conversation regarding opinions, unless one is referring to a currently open court case.

If you ask me, if an opinion is not your own, you should not claim it as your own. Unless of course you are a mindless zombie.

I assume your panties are in a bunch because we pointed out the executive order you freaked out about was a mild amendment to Clinton's previous executive order.
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2012 5:15:58 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/6/2012 5:04:22 PM, 000ike wrote:
You're complaining of something you're 99.99% likely guilty of yourself,...like the rest of the world. Your opinions are not your own, english is not yours, the ideology of Libertarianism is not yours. You derive your positions from others. That's how we learn

correlation =/= causation
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2012 5:21:20 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/6/2012 5:07:24 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 4/6/2012 4:13:19 PM, DanT wrote:
I find it really annoying how people no longer think for themselves.

When it comes to legislation, or executive orders they rather quote some blog run by some layman with no more expertise then themselves. Rather that or they quote a politician, or news station.
People don't take the time to read for themselves, and they believe what ever the middle man tells them.

When it comes to the constitutionality of something, people prefer to quote a blog or supreme court justice, rather than read the constitution themselves. The supreme court rulings are only relevant to court cases, and can only be enforced by lower courts. They have no relevance in a private conversation regarding opinions, unless one is referring to a currently open court case.

If you ask me, if an opinion is not your own, you should not claim it as your own. Unless of course you are a mindless zombie.

I assume your panties are in a bunch because we pointed out the executive order you freaked out about was a mild amendment to Clinton's previous executive order.

No, I'm just sick of people replying with simple quotes, without putting in any effort, critical thinking or original thought. People constantly do it, and it's annoying. I'm tired of arguing with quotes, I prefer to debate something that thinks. If I wanted to argue with quotes I would buy a recorder.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2012 5:22:27 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/6/2012 4:36:47 PM, darkkermit wrote:
"Great minds think for themselves."
-Proverb quote

1.) that proverb is correct
2.) next time use your own words
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2012 5:33:09 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/6/2012 5:21:20 PM, DanT wrote:
No, I'm just sick of people replying with simple quotes, without putting in any effort, critical thinking or original thought. People constantly do it, and it's annoying. I'm tired of arguing with quotes, I prefer to debate something that thinks. If I wanted to argue with quotes I would buy a recorder.

"And so he asked 'why fear the fact that the words belong not to me, but to another? For the question itself remains, and an answer is expected nonetheless'!"
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2012 5:35:55 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/6/2012 5:15:58 PM, DanT wrote:
At 4/6/2012 5:04:22 PM, 000ike wrote:
You're complaining of something you're 99.99% likely guilty of yourself,...like the rest of the world. Your opinions are not your own, english is not yours, the ideology of Libertarianism is not yours. You derive your positions from others. That's how we learn

correlation =/= causation

Barking inapplicable fallacies doesn't actually refute anything....
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2012 5:43:41 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/6/2012 5:29:17 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
Did you invent the English language?

what the hell does that have to do with opinions?
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2012 5:45:38 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/6/2012 5:33:09 PM, Kleptin wrote:
At 4/6/2012 5:21:20 PM, DanT wrote:
No, I'm just sick of people replying with simple quotes, without putting in any effort, critical thinking or original thought. People constantly do it, and it's annoying. I'm tired of arguing with quotes, I prefer to debate something that thinks. If I wanted to argue with quotes I would buy a recorder.

"And so he asked 'why fear the fact that the words belong not to me, but to another? For the question itself remains, and an answer is expected nonetheless'!"

Because you are spewing words that you have put no thought into. It's an appeal to authority. Just because you are quoting someone, does not mean the quote is factual, or reliable in any way.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2012 5:49:04 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/6/2012 5:35:55 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 4/6/2012 5:15:58 PM, DanT wrote:
At 4/6/2012 5:04:22 PM, 000ike wrote:
You're complaining of something you're 99.99% likely guilty of yourself,...like the rest of the world. Your opinions are not your own, english is not yours, the ideology of Libertarianism is not yours. You derive your positions from others. That's how we learn

correlation =/= causation

Barking inapplicable fallacies doesn't actually refute anything....

A.) It does not matter what language I speak. Language is irrelevant when it comes to opinions. An opinion in French is the same as in English.
B.) I am Libertarian because my preexisting beliefs most closely resembles libertarianism
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2012 5:53:55 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Because you are spewing words that you have put no thought into. It's an appeal to authority. Just because you are quoting someone, does not mean the quote is factual, or reliable in any way.:

I trust you can appreciate the irony in having multiple quotes as your signature. ^_^

I get that it's taboo to argue solely by quoting others, but it almost sounds like you're condemning quoting altogether.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2012 5:56:02 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The stupidest part of this whole thing is that DanT is the only person in this entire website that uses quotes from the Dictionary as an argument...
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2012 6:08:37 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Wouldn't it be more apt to say that people don't SPEAK for themselves?

A quote rebuttal and an original rebuttal don't differ in terms of how much thought went into understanding and developing an opposing view. They differ in terms of how that view is phrased.

For example, I wouldn't quote "Green Eggs and Ham" in a debate about God. I would grind the gears in my head, come up with an idea, and if someone has said it more eloquently before me, I can use that quote.

So yes, thinking does go into the use of quotes, at least, the important part of understanding an argument and offering a rebuttal. Phrasing it in a nice, succinct, eloquent way is a different thing altogether.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2012 6:10:06 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I told my friend I research my opinion, then he went on a DanT rampage on dont quote people.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2012 6:16:24 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/6/2012 5:53:55 PM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:
Because you are spewing words that you have put no thought into. It's an appeal to authority. Just because you are quoting someone, does not mean the quote is factual, or reliable in any way.:

I trust you can appreciate the irony in having multiple quotes as your signature. ^_^

the quotes in my sig are of stupid things people say.


I get that it's taboo to argue solely by quoting others, but it almost sounds like you're condemning quoting altogether.

One can quote others, as a support to their own opinions. But to rely on a quote to serve as the base or whole of your argument is fallacious.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2012 6:18:00 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/6/2012 5:56:02 PM, 000ike wrote:
The stupidest part of this whole thing is that DanT is the only person in this entire website that uses quotes from the Dictionary as an argument...

I don't use it as an argument, I use it to prove someone misused a word.
I use the dictionary to support my preexisting claim.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2012 6:18:27 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/6/2012 5:58:05 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
So living in a bubble has value?

Living in a bubble =/= critical thinking
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2012 6:20:24 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Another thing that bugs me is when people cite sources without reading the source. Or when people chop up quotes in order to take them out of context, so that it fits their agenda.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2012 6:23:13 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/6/2012 6:16:24 PM, DanT wrote:
One can quote others, as a support to their own opinions. But to rely on a quote to serve as the base or whole of your argument is fallacious.

It's appeal to authority. But is this what you're lashing out at specifically? Seems like you had a problem with quotes in general.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2012 6:39:43 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/6/2012 6:23:13 PM, Kleptin wrote:
At 4/6/2012 6:16:24 PM, DanT wrote:
One can quote others, as a support to their own opinions. But to rely on a quote to serve as the base or whole of your argument is fallacious.

It's appeal to authority. But is this what you're lashing out at specifically? Seems like you had a problem with quotes in general.

That's what happens when you don't read the whole text. Another problem is allot of people only skim through text, and than starts to argue against something nobody said.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2012 6:43:25 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/6/2012 6:39:43 PM, DanT wrote:
That's what happens when you don't read the whole text. Another problem is allot of people only skim through text, and than starts to argue against something nobody said.

I actually think it's *your* fault for not being clear and concise in your very first post. Granted, I didn't see that response you made to someone else on the second page about appeals to authority and the validity of a quote as an argument, but nothing in the OP or the entire first page shows that distinction. You were simply talking about how quotes have substituted actual opinions and you didn't like it.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2012 7:12:03 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
So yes, thinking does go into the use of quotes, at least, the important part of understanding an argument and offering a rebuttal. Phrasing it in a nice, succinct, eloquent way is a different thing altogether.:

No one likes a quote-bomber, granted, but a quote inserted after paraphrasing a position can give it an extra punch. I don't see anything wrong with it when used sparingly. Inserting a quote now and again does not constitute quote-bombing. A quote-bomber is somebody like, Reasoning, who doesn't have an original thought in his brain and the overwhelming bulk of his "arguments" are simply snippets from some other individuals work.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2012 7:13:14 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/6/2012 7:12:03 PM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:
So yes, thinking does go into the use of quotes, at least, the important part of understanding an argument and offering a rebuttal. Phrasing it in a nice, succinct, eloquent way is a different thing altogether.:

No one likes a quote-bomber, granted, but a quote inserted after paraphrasing a position can give it an extra punch. I don't see anything wrong with it when used sparingly. Inserting a quote now and again does not constitute quote-bombing. A quote-bomber is somebody like, Reasoning, who doesn't have an original thought in his brain and the overwhelming bulk of his "arguments" are simply snippets from some other individuals work.


This.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/6/2012 7:18:15 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/6/2012 6:16:24 PM, DanT wrote:
At 4/6/2012 5:53:55 PM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:
Because you are spewing words that you have put no thought into. It's an appeal to authority. Just because you are quoting someone, does not mean the quote is factual, or reliable in any way.:

I trust you can appreciate the irony in having multiple quotes as your signature. ^_^

the quotes in my sig are of stupid things people say.:

The point is that quotes are not de facto wrong. Sometimes people use excerpts as thought provocation to get a topic going.

One can quote others, as a support to their own opinions. But to rely on a quote to serve as the base or whole of your argument is fallacious.:

Agreed, but who besides Reasoning does that on a regular basis that would warrant the scathing OP? You made it sound like the majority of DDO'ans do this. I really don't see that being the case. It also makes you come across as sanctimonious, as if you have to suffer the idiocy of us all and it would such a shame not realize your genius. It smacks of hubris and is a little condescending.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)