Against Ideology

[living sounds]

Great article:

https://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/against-ideology/?fbclid=IwAR2gA_jwgdOYvnWn5H-Nz_MXo-dWE8Lh5Up18ZqYQDkKD81iWqwdHyr7zlQ

 

[gyraf]

A really great read. Thanks!

Recommended.

It is a supreme mistake to attach any self-identifying label to any belief, to tie your identity or sense of self-worth to a belief or any empirical conclusion. Because then facts become personal..

Jakob E.

 

[JohnRoberts]

I don't know if this is on topic but IMO a refreshing viewpoint about some controversial topics.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSXulItnq-s&fbclid=IwAR2DDpkMb1nQOZRiPZAjeBQK6Ou_sMNH3KIDa24yOPFaJqlCGiuPBQs1HzI&app=desktop

I am not big on watching and sharing videos but this guy seems pretty thoughtful.

JR

 

[scott2000]

Good video.... Some interesting thoughts....... didn't know about the zoo animals....yikes....

My buddies and I were hanging out one night talking joking  ;D about how we were going to raid the dog food manufacturing plant not too far from here if stuff ever hit the fan.....  dog food today is made with some great food...... They even have livestock on site.....

total nutrition.....

I like D R's videos..... he's had some pretty good guests.....

 

[living sounds]

A thread sharing an article about the problems of Ideology gets bombed with a video about a Cato-Institute-affilliated libertarian ideologe in post nr. 3....  Thanks.

 

[JohnRoberts]

A thread sharing an article about the problems of Ideology gets bombed with a video about a Cato-Institute-affilliated libertarian ideologe in post nr. 3....  Thanks.

I tried to read your link but found it laced with ideology... 

I thought that video I posted shared some different thoughtful perspective (not counter ideological bombing), but subjective opinions clearly vary.

If this offended you, I am sorry, mea culpa. Another reason I rarely click or share videos.  :

JR

 

[scott2000]

A thread sharing an article about the problems of Ideology gets bombed with a video about a Cato-Institute-affilliated libertarian ideologe in post nr. 3....  Thanks.

lol..

I liked your link too.....

Come on now........"feel  free from the oppressive burden of having to support one side or ideology"

 

[living sounds]

I tried to read your link but found it laced with ideology... 

It is not. It may seem so to the ideologically disposed though...

 

[scott2000]

Hello, hello, hello....

" ideological bubbles of information that reinforce our tribe and demonize all others. "

 

[JohnRoberts]

It is not. It may seem so to the ideologically disposed though...

If I was a smart as you I'd probably be offended by that... but like you know..  :

JR

 

[benb]

Does this mean I should stop calling myself a human being?

 

[sodderboy]

At least it only wasted a page of pulp. . .
What’s empty in the content is that the “skeptical, ideology-free” author is not skeptical regarding “climate change”.  The “settled science” must have satisfied his skepticalimus appetite.
I’m sure he’ll make it up with heapum-big skepticism towards “universal healthcare” and “living wages” in future anideological ruminations.
I’ll stay tuned to his skepticalicity journey!
Mike

 

[gyraf]

Aah - but that is actually the whole idea: make the analysis on the available data, not on your gut feel.. 

Jakob E.

 

[benb]

Aah - but that is actually the whole idea: make the analysis on the available data, not on your gut feel.. 

Jakob E.

Often (more often than ever thesedays!) a headline can be misleading - be sure to read everything including "minor caveats."
https://bigthink.com/surprising-science/parachute-study

 

[Matador]

At least it only wasted a page of pulp. . .
What’s empty in the content is that the “skeptical, ideology-free” author is not skeptical regarding “climate change”.  The “settled science” must have satisfied his skepticalimus appetite.
I’m sure he’ll make it up with heapum-big skepticism towards “universal healthcare” and “living wages” in future anideological ruminations.
I’ll stay tuned to his skepticalicity journey!
Mike

I think you resoundingly proved his original point.  ;D

 

[sodderboy]

I think you resoundingly proved his original point.  ;D

Not at all.  You judge me but do you have any skepticism for your beliefs?  I did with mine when I bought into global cooling about the time it became global warming, and found that the other planets in our solar system have fluctuating temps that ride the same as ours, and many of them put us to shame with the amount of burning, carbon production, and pollution going on.
The surface temperatures seem to fluctuate with what the Fat Old Sun is doing.  Hmmmm.  I also found that settled scientists are beholden to their financiers in the amounts of tens of billions that, gee, might influence the direction of their findings.  Neil Degrasse Tyson, my favorite astro-politicist, is a prime example.  He knows not to bite the hands that feed him, so is he really to be trusted as un-ideological?  Or the lists of all the data jerryrigging going on at all levels of collection and manipulation and modeling.
Add to that that, the solution to stop the destruction of the planet is carbon taxes and credits run through market exchanges run by the likes of Al Gore and Goldman Sachs.  That does not make many settled science folks skeptical?  And "clean energy" technologies that are huge money holes doing more damage and pollution to the environment that the fossil fuels that they replace.
It's all things that make ya go hmmm, things that make ya go hmmm-hmmm-hmmm.  Well, not you Matador.
Wishing you a great holiday!
Mike 

 

[Matador]

Not quite - the article was about approaching each topic with an open mind, and not allowing ones preconceived notions to cloud a better understanding of a topic: to let evidence guide one towards knowledge.

Are you not seeing the irony?

 

[scott2000]

  That does not make many settled science folks skeptical?  And "clean energy" technologies that are huge money holes doing more damage and pollution to the environment that the fossil fuels that they replace.

It's crazy. Where I live there's a big to do about some local moms suing the power plant for contamination of the area.....  I'm definitely concerned but, what gets me is that , after 5 seconds of G, one of these "local moms",(or a woman with the same exact name)  is an active person in a huge FL climate activist group. That's all fine and, I'm definitely a fan of not dying because of some industrial toxicity but, why is there no mention of this activist group connection anywhere.... it's very obvious to me that this could be tied into the whole deal....There's even a mention of back and forth between the power plant and this group right on their website along with several pics of of a woman with the same exact name...maybe just a coincidence...... ....and this one woman  in the lawsuit is some local water engineering consultant.

I don't like the shadiness if this is the case and, although I understand the benefits of keeping some stuff under wraps, it seems like if you are going to take on a huge decision like this and destroy the property values of an entire region, things should just be more open and go from there... I'm sure everyone would be cool with some organization fighting the bad guys ......

I have a small pond in my backyard and it's had the same fish in it for over 10 years so, I'm not terribly worried but, who knows....

to be honest, I'm hoping it's a big coincidence that this mom's name just so happens to be the same as another lady ....

 

[sodderboy]

Not quite - the article was about approaching each topic with an open mind, and not allowing ones preconceived notions to cloud a better understanding of a topic: to let evidence guide one towards knowledge.

Are you not seeing the irony?

Yes.

"We actively tell our audience not to trust us (don’t trust any single source – verify with logic and evidence). Our belief is that you really should not have beliefs, only tentative conclusions. Essentially, our ideology is anti-ideology.

This is because scientific skepticism is not about any set of beliefs or conclusions. It is all about process, just like science itself – question, observe, analyze, repeat."

And yet he accepts "climate change" as a "settled science" and celebrates Max Boon's conversion to belief that "there is an overwhelming consensus that anthropogenic climate change is real and a problem."

I find that totally, hilariously ironical!  Don't you?  Nope, which is also ironic.  Even though it is part of the world of disguised, insidious hatred, I love it!

Mike

 

[Matador]

Well, ok.  The words "settled science" don't even appear in that article, and "overwhelming consensus" doesn't even remotely approach the same definition. 

But this must be another "we're watching two different movies" thing.