Rationalskepticism,lol part III.

[Mr.Samsa]

Samsa likes deez nuts on his ratatouille.

But you have no nuts, you dropped them when I pointed out your tinfoil hat conspiracies about mental illness...

[laklak]

Organic, free-range. 100% natural rats.

[JimC]

Organic, free-range. 100% natural ratz.

That's our forum, alright!

[piscator]

You're going to have to repost. We can't hear either of you in the vacuum of Samsa's last remark.

[Mr.Samsa]

You're going to have to repost. We can't hear either of you in the vacuum of Samsa's last remark.

Maybe you could fill the vacuum with more conspiracy theories about how mental illnesses don't exist?

[Scott1328]

You're going to have to repost. We can't hear either of you in the vacuum of Samsa's last remark.

Maybe you could fill the vacuum with more conspiracy theories about how mental illnesses don't exist?

Do you have a link to this? It looks like a fun read.

[piscator]

I'd like to see it too.

[DaveDodo007]

You're going to have to repost. We can't hear either of you in the vacuum of Samsa's last remark.

Maybe you could fill the vacuum with more conspiracy theories about how mental illnesses don't exist?

I for one will not doubt your lived experience.

[DaveDodo007]

There are so many odd assumptions here that I'm not entirely sure you meant to respond to me as it seems to have little relevance to what I wrote. In case you did mean to respond to me, I'll try to clarify some points:

1) I haven't denied that biology plays a role. My claim is that it doesn't play the specific role that Eliezer needs it to. In other words, general biological functions or predispositions might lead us to a particular conclusion or behavior but that's not the same as saying that something is an evolutionary adaptation, which is a more restricted type of behavior.

I think it does, both evolution and human evolution still play a part in human tribalistic thinking or motivational thinking if you will. I can't say you and rEv are stupid because that would be false. I can say that to move beyond your tribalistic parameters makes you uncomfortable and therefore you come to the conclusion that it is wrong. You both rationalize feeling and then think you are rational.

But tribalistic or motivated thinking isn't necessary innate or biological, which becomes even more true when you make more specific claims like "politics evolved to deal with warfare".

I'm not sure what the comment directed at me is supposed to mean, my political beliefs and affiliations switch quite dramatically so I don't think any evolutionary explanation will be able to fully account for them.

2) even if my claim made implications about the existence of free will (it doesn't), that's not a problem. There are a number of good arguments in favour of free will and the acceptance or rejection of determinism doesn't necessarily have any relevance at all.

Non sequitur is a non sequitur, my apologies and ignore it.

Fair enough.

3) where did the distinction between analytic and emotional reasoning come from? You seem to be conflating analytic with "non-biological" and emotional with "biological" when there's no reason to think that. Rejecting that there is a specific evolutionary adaptation towards political stances does not mean political stances are carefully reasoned out.

People can have analytic thought processes and critical thinking ability when it comes to politics. I'm simply pointing out that they decide to follow their feeling instead and then try rationalize their emotions. This works when it comes to politics so there is no need to change it except if you want an honest debate, which unfortunately most people don't. This is why politicians are not held in high esteem because they exploit this and are then blamed for the people's own gullibility.

Sort of. Firstly, you seem to be agreeing with me now that the evolutionary angle is a misunderstanding and instead that it's better to view it as an emotional vs rational distinction.

Secondly, you're right that often we start with emotional motivations and these create a framework that dictates what kinds of evidence we expose ourselves to and what we don't, but it's not true that reasons and rational arguments are unnecessary or don't change minds.

Sorry for not addressing your points individually but it seems we are talking at cross purposes here. I wasn't saying ALL political arguments are predicated with emotive thinking just a lot of them. From what I see, you are agreeing with that, though if that is not the case then please elaborate or else I think we are done here.

[Mr.Samsa]

You're going to have to repost. We can't hear either of you in the vacuum of Samsa's last remark.

Maybe you could fill the vacuum with more conspiracy theories about how mental illnesses don't exist?

Do you have a link to this? It looks like a fun read.

I can't even remember to be honest. At some point I think he made comments along the lines of psychotherapy not being effective, or that talking to a friend is as good as talking to a therapist, or something like that. I'm mostly just talking shit cause I'm bored.

Sorry for not addressing your points individually but it seems we are talking at cross purposes here. I wasn't saying ALL political arguments are predicated with emotive thinking just a lot of them. From what I see, you are agreeing with that, though if that is not the case then please elaborate or else I think we are done here.

Yeah as I stated initially my concern was just with the evolutionary speculation and then you just seemed to be making too strong a claim about most people basing their reasoning on emotion and so not being receptive to reasoning. I agree that emotive processes tend to form the basis for many of our ideas but I'd quibble over the extent to which it affects the degree to which reasoning can shift our views.

But otherwise I'm not disagreeing too much.

[DaveDodo007]

So how are the feelz are realz and fuck science lefty feminist twats doing over there?

[DaveDodo007]

it looks like the bunch of lemmings that pass for retarded cuckold self loathing twats at ratskep, have realized that their using insults and shaming tactics to shut down debate have left them out of the loop. Fucking retarded cunts the lot of them. instead of, you know, allowing freedom of speech and people with different political positions having a say, fuck that shit we are lefty swivel eyed loons with the IQ of a dead ant. Still stand up DD, Fallible and emerafuckit or what ever her name was to stifle debate, fascism salutes your anti-freedom stance. Still don't be despondent as I will always remember your anti skepticism, anti-free thought, anti evidence and anti fact and science stance. You will always be a Ray Comfort of atheism.

[Brian Peacock]

Put the bottle down and step away from the keyboard.

[DaveDodo007]

Put the bottle down and step away from the keyboard.

Haven't had a drink for 10 weeks now and not going to have one until Sept 4th. More time for me to expose Ratskep as ideologues and I also get to insult them. Which should be fine as they are delusional twats.

[Brian Peacock]

Yous funny. You really think that however many thousand members they have are all of one mind and one heart, or are you just pissed that they didn't bow down to sup from your massive teat?