|
|
Post by John B on Jul 21, 2024 10:23:37 GMT -5
Not to insert myself (he said, inserting himself), but my Google-fu has yet to find the "source from the right" counter-claim, at least if I use "28 lies" as part of the search string. A URL to the source of such an assertion is the most helpful, but if one wants to avoid driving traffic to a site/source, at least naming it would allow another one to look at the precise claim and its source and, um, do one's own research. Why would you look for it? That's the point. You wouldn't believe it if you found it. That's some next level, 4-D chess you're playing. |
|
|
|
Post by millring on Jul 21, 2024 10:54:37 GMT -5
Why would you look for it? That's the point. You wouldn't believe it if you found it. That's some next level, 4-D chess you're playing. And you're not presenting an argument. You're merely, obliquely trying to frame my arguments off kilter. |
|
|
|
Post by John B on Jul 21, 2024 11:49:09 GMT -5
That's some next level, 4-D chess you're playing. And you're not presenting an argument. You're merely, obliquely trying to frame my arguments off kilter. A. Here's a fact. B. Can you link to it for me? I can't find it. A. No, because you've already come to a conclusion and you'll never change your mind. B. Not even an opportunity to evaluate it? A. No. Checkmate. |
|
|
|
Post by Russell Letson on Jul 21, 2024 11:53:32 GMT -5
Why would you look for it? That's the point. You wouldn't believe it if you found it. You would be confirmed in your belief that Biden tells the truth and Trump lies. There isn't anything that could convince you that if Trump says anything with which you disagree he's not lying. That's the point. Every single belief now comes down to sources because we've been trained to believe everything is a binary between lies and the truth ( because we can't know the truth). I would look for it because, by training and professional experience*, I am inclined to check claims, and that starts with establishing exactly what the claim is, so I understand exactly what I am being asked to believe--the precise framing of the claim. Then I look at the source, because not all sources are equally reliable. And reliability is established by the quality of evidence on offer and its sources. The quality of past claims made by the source matter, too. It would be foolish to take at face value any claim about health matters coming from RFK Jr.--I think it's fair to put him in the "unreliable" category. I also take serious exception to that assertion about binaries, but that's a sociological and epistemological discussion that I don't have time for right now. Short version: We do the best we can in a universe where a degree of uncertainty is inevitable. But our culture has spent about 2500 years designing protocols to reduce uncertainty and devising ways of talking about it. My toolkit comes out of that tradition, and I deploy it with care. BTW, I don't have to ask a pundit about Trump's contrafactual utterances--or about whatever untruths or exaggerations Biden might offer. All I have to do is listen and check my extensive lists of pretty-reliable and probably-mostly-true stuff. I may be a country mouse, but I went to school in the big city. * That training, by the way, does not "come down to sources because we've been trained to believe everything is a binary between lies and the truth ( because we can't know the truth)." It includes finding sources because source-checking is a fundamental component of analysis--it was, for example, the first required course in every English grad-school curriculum. It was essential to doing professional journalism. (It mattered whether I got to talk to, say, a corporation's PR guy or the engineer who worked on a product.) |
|
|
|
Post by millring on Jul 21, 2024 13:44:05 GMT -5
And you're not presenting an argument. You're merely, obliquely trying to frame my arguments off kilter. A. Here's a fact. B. Can you link to it for me? I can't find it. A. No, because you've already come to a conclusion and you'll never change your mind. B. Not even an opportunity to evaluate it? A. No. Checkmate. No, I can't link to it because it was audio without transcript. But it doesn't change the truth in the quote I posted. We are collectively addled and cling blindly to the sources that allow us to not change our minds, confident that the ever present "they" are liars. Without even much trying I could easily list at least five lies that the left depends on in every campaign of my lifetime. |
|
|
|
Post by John B on Jul 21, 2024 14:27:24 GMT -5
A. Here's a fact. B. Can you link to it for me? I can't find it. A. No, because you've already come to a conclusion and you'll never change your mind. B. Not even an opportunity to evaluate it? A. No. Checkmate. No, I can't link to it because it was audio without transcript. But it doesn't change the truth in the quote I posted. We are collectively addled and cling blindly to the sources that allow us to not change our minds, confident that the ever present "they" are liars. Without even much trying I could easily list at least five lies that the left depends on in every campaign of my lifetime. It's sad that you're clinging blindly to that audio, confident that anyone who doesn't agree is a liar. I swear, it's the truth. |
|
|
|
Post by theevan on Jul 21, 2024 15:42:20 GMT -5
Part of the problem is having different sets of sources that are believed to be merchants of truth. Each of whom have their own biases and make their own mistakes.
(Although, was it a "mistake" that the legacy media somehow failed to show Biden's failing condition for the past few years? See what I mean?)
|
|
|
|
Post by howard lee on Jul 21, 2024 15:50:49 GMT -5
Part of the problem is having different sets of sources that are believed to be merchants of truth. Each of whom have their own biases and make their own mistakes. (Although, was it a "mistake" that the legacy media somehow failed to show Biden's failing condition for the past few years? See what I mean?)
I think the media showed his condition with every news report and video. It was there for all of us to see. The media just didn't call attention to it by commenting on it much for the past few years, so most people wrote it off or made excuses. I'd still vote for him if he were on life support, over the competition.
|
|
|
|
Post by Marshall on Jul 21, 2024 16:55:58 GMT -5
You mean you want me to link to the source that claimed they counted the lies told by Biden? Why? Because I want to know who said it and what they said. I believe it’s quite possible (likely?) Biden misrepresented statistics or other data. It’s what politicians do. I’m not picking on you. I just want to know. |
|
