Surface Knowledge

mattsl1983

Is google and the fact that you can did any information possible to support what you think is right making the world more decisive?

I had an interesting discussion tonight with a couple of friends and the subject of surface knowledge came up.  Now it seems everyone is an expert on everything.  They have read one article and are now an expert.  

I guess going back to my college days and actually learning how to research and fact check are days of the past.  We would get assigned a subject and a side and you had to make sure your facts were right.  Today it seems those are practices of the past.

I guess my question, especially now in the world we live in, do you think this surface knowledge has contributed to where American culture is now, the divide and none budging sides?  The debates here on this forum that jump from random article to personal beliefs to an article that supports those beliefs?  It seems everyone is an expert and the art of actual debate is gone.  Sidestep something you don’t want to answer, sidestep something you can’t answer, shift to a point you want to make.  

Anyways, thoughts, opinions?  I think it would be a great thesis for a grad student.

brianlux

That really would make a great thesis subject!

"surface knowledge" I like that wording.  That's exactly what much of it is- surface knowledge.

I think you're right on this, matts.  It's easy to get sucked in by some of the stuff that's out there (and there's a lot of stuff out there).  I'm guessing most of us here have formed at least a bit of a knee jerk reaction or opinion to something we've read on the internet.  Have I ever done that?  Guilty!

Part of the problem is (and I think this may have been studied and shown to be likely) is that people's attention spans are being reduced by using and relying on electronic media as much and as often as we do. 

That where I think good books are useful.  It takes more time and the commitment of thinking energy to read a well written, well researched book about a subject.

But what books?  That leads to the usefulness of having a reasonably good sense of the author's legitimacy, intent, biases, sense of humor, humanity, etc.  In other words, is this person's work worthy of my time?  Am I just being spoon fed information or am I being challenged at least a little to develop my own thoughts and conclusions?  The ones who really give you that opportunity for learning or growing or laughing will pass the test of time and scrutiny. 

It really makes sense to try to find sources of information or inspiration or even just enjoyment that come from honest efforts that are worthy of your time.  Edward Abbey, for example, often said of his own writing that if, nothing else, it was "honest" (and it was!).  And he expected you would probably disagree with some of what he said.   Wendell Berry is another one.  Berry is as humble, knowledgeable, wise, and sincere as anyone I've ever read.  And of course, Kurt Vonnegut Jr. who also happened to like "farting around".

Great thread idea, matts!

Halifax2TheMax

mattsl1983 said:

Is google and the fact that you can did any information possible to support what you think is right making the world more decisive?

I had an interesting discussion tonight with a couple of friends and the subject of surface knowledge came up.  Now it seems everyone is an expert on everything.  They have read one article and are now an expert.  

I guess going back to my college days and actually learning how to research and fact check are days of the past.  We would get assigned a subject and a side and you had to make sure your facts were right.  Today it seems those are practices of the past.

I guess my question, especially now in the world we live in, do you think this surface knowledge has contributed to where American culture is now, the divide and none budging sides?  The debates here on this forum that jump from random article to personal beliefs to an article that supports those beliefs?  It seems everyone is an expert and the art of actual debate is gone.  Sidestep something you don’t want to answer, sidestep something you can’t answer, shift to a point you want to make.  

Anyways, thoughts, opinions?  I think it would be a great thesis for a grad student.

“Everyone is an expert on everything.” Got a link to that “fact?” Because of Google?

mattsl1983

Halifax2TheMax said:

mattsl1983 said:

Is google and the fact that you can did any information possible to support what you think is right making the world more decisive?

I had an interesting discussion tonight with a couple of friends and the subject of surface knowledge came up.  Now it seems everyone is an expert on everything.  They have read one article and are now an expert.  

I guess going back to my college days and actually learning how to research and fact check are days of the past.  We would get assigned a subject and a side and you had to make sure your facts were right.  Today it seems those are practices of the past.

I guess my question, especially now in the world we live in, do you think this surface knowledge has contributed to where American culture is now, the divide and none budging sides?  The debates here on this forum that jump from random article to personal beliefs to an article that supports those beliefs?  It seems everyone is an expert and the art of actual debate is gone.  Sidestep something you don’t want to answer, sidestep something you can’t answer, shift to a point you want to make.  

Anyways, thoughts, opinions?  I think it would be a great thesis for a grad student.

“Everyone is an expert on everything.” Got a link to that “fact?” Because of Google?

Go troll another post bro.  You are repetitive and tiring.  Again you offer nothing but wanting to argue.

Halifax2TheMax

mattsl1983 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

mattsl1983 said:

Is google and the fact that you can did any information possible to support what you think is right making the world more decisive?

I had an interesting discussion tonight with a couple of friends and the subject of surface knowledge came up.  Now it seems everyone is an expert on everything.  They have read one article and are now an expert.  

I guess going back to my college days and actually learning how to research and fact check are days of the past.  We would get assigned a subject and a side and you had to make sure your facts were right.  Today it seems those are practices of the past.

I guess my question, especially now in the world we live in, do you think this surface knowledge has contributed to where American culture is now, the divide and none budging sides?  The debates here on this forum that jump from random article to personal beliefs to an article that supports those beliefs?  It seems everyone is an expert and the art of actual debate is gone.  Sidestep something you don’t want to answer, sidestep something you can’t answer, shift to a point you want to make.  

Anyways, thoughts, opinions?  I think it would be a great thesis for a grad student.

“Everyone is an expert on everything.” Got a link to that “fact?” Because of Google?

Go troll another post bro.  You are repetitive and tiring.  Again you offer nothing but wanting to argue.

Try to “prove your point,” yo.

mattsl1983

brianlux said:

That really would make a great thesis subject!

"surface knowledge" I like that wording.  That's exactly what much of it is- surface knowledge.

I think you're right on this, matts.  It's easy to get sucked in by some of the stuff that's out there (and there's a lot of stuff out there).  I'm guessing most of us here have formed at least a bit of a knee jerk reaction or opinion to something we've read on the internet.  Have I ever done that?  Guilty!

Part of the problem is (and I think this may have been studied and shown to be likely) is that people's attention spans are being reduced by using and relying on electronic media as much and as often as we do. 

That where I think good books are useful.  It takes more time and the commitment of thinking energy to read a well written, well researched book about a subject.

But what books?  That leads to the usefulness of having a reasonably good sense of the author's legitimacy, intent, biases, sense of humor, humanity, etc.  In other words, is this person's work worthy of my time?  Am I just being spoon fed information or am I being challenged at least a little to develop my own thoughts and conclusions?  The ones who really give you that opportunity for learning or growing or laughing will pass the test of time and scrutiny. 

It really makes sense to try to find sources of information or inspiration or even just enjoyment that come from honest efforts that are worthy of your time.  Edward Abbey, for example, often said of his own writing that if, nothing else, it was "honest" (and it was!).  And he expected you would probably disagree with some of what he said.   Wendell Berry is another one.  Berry is as humble, knowledgeable, wise, and sincere as anyone I've ever read.  And of course, Kurt Vonnegut Jr. who also happened to like "farting around".

Great thread idea, matts!

You make great great points that didn’t even come up earlier when we were talking about it.  

mattsl1983

Halifax2TheMax said:

mattsl1983 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

mattsl1983 said:

Is google and the fact that you can did any information possible to support what you think is right making the world more decisive?

I had an interesting discussion tonight with a couple of friends and the subject of surface knowledge came up.  Now it seems everyone is an expert on everything.  They have read one article and are now an expert.  

I guess going back to my college days and actually learning how to research and fact check are days of the past.  We would get assigned a subject and a side and you had to make sure your facts were right.  Today it seems those are practices of the past.

I guess my question, especially now in the world we live in, do you think this surface knowledge has contributed to where American culture is now, the divide and none budging sides?  The debates here on this forum that jump from random article to personal beliefs to an article that supports those beliefs?  It seems everyone is an expert and the art of actual debate is gone.  Sidestep something you don’t want to answer, sidestep something you can’t answer, shift to a point you want to make.  

Anyways, thoughts, opinions?  I think it would be a great thesis for a grad student.

“Everyone is an expert on everything.” Got a link to that “fact?” Because of Google?

Go troll another post bro.  You are repetitive and tiring.  Again you offer nothing but wanting to argue.

Try to “prove your point,” yo.

You really don’t stop do you?  This post is made from social observations.  As much as you would like me to debat that with you, it’s a social observation that I’ve noticed and apparently others have.  Again if you want to troll, go find another thread.  If you want to offer some insight as to why you don’t think it’s true, then share your insight.  Otherwise your comments at least from me will be ignored, such as I’ve ignored them on other threads.  

Halifax2TheMax

mattsl1983 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

mattsl1983 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

mattsl1983 said:

Is google and the fact that you can did any information possible to support what you think is right making the world more decisive?

I had an interesting discussion tonight with a couple of friends and the subject of surface knowledge came up.  Now it seems everyone is an expert on everything.  They have read one article and are now an expert.  

I guess going back to my college days and actually learning how to research and fact check are days of the past.  We would get assigned a subject and a side and you had to make sure your facts were right.  Today it seems those are practices of the past.

I guess my question, especially now in the world we live in, do you think this surface knowledge has contributed to where American culture is now, the divide and none budging sides?  The debates here on this forum that jump from random article to personal beliefs to an article that supports those beliefs?  It seems everyone is an expert and the art of actual debate is gone.  Sidestep something you don’t want to answer, sidestep something you can’t answer, shift to a point you want to make.  

Anyways, thoughts, opinions?  I think it would be a great thesis for a grad student.

“Everyone is an expert on everything.” Got a link to that “fact?” Because of Google?

Go troll another post bro.  You are repetitive and tiring.  Again you offer nothing but wanting to argue.

Try to “prove your point,” yo.

You really don’t stop do you?  This post is made from social observations.  As much as you would like me to debat that with you, it’s a social observation that I’ve noticed and apparently others have.  Again if you want to troll, go find another thread.  If you want to offer some insight as to why you don’t think it’s true, then share your insight.  Otherwise your comments at least from me will be ignored, such as I’ve ignored them on other threads.  

Okay then, that’s a start. If I had said all gun owners are murderers you’d jump up my ass. So, you claiming everyone is dumbed down because of the Internet, and as such, has lead to political polarization to a degree that we can’t find common ground? I call bullshit. Certainly there’s a degree of stupidity out there but in general, there has never been an age where so much information has been available to the greatest percentage of our worlds population and as such, the “white” world order is being upended. I haven’t been dumbed down because of misinformation on the interwebs because I’m capable of critical thought. And most of the world is as well except for Team Trump Treason’s MAGA.

if you don’t want to debate, get off the debate page.
 

mattsl1983

Halifax2TheMax said:

mattsl1983 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

mattsl1983 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

mattsl1983 said:

Is google and the fact that you can did any information possible to support what you think is right making the world more decisive?

I had an interesting discussion tonight with a couple of friends and the subject of surface knowledge came up.  Now it seems everyone is an expert on everything.  They have read one article and are now an expert.  

I guess going back to my college days and actually learning how to research and fact check are days of the past.  We would get assigned a subject and a side and you had to make sure your facts were right.  Today it seems those are practices of the past.

I guess my question, especially now in the world we live in, do you think this surface knowledge has contributed to where American culture is now, the divide and none budging sides?  The debates here on this forum that jump from random article to personal beliefs to an article that supports those beliefs?  It seems everyone is an expert and the art of actual debate is gone.  Sidestep something you don’t want to answer, sidestep something you can’t answer, shift to a point you want to make.  

Anyways, thoughts, opinions?  I think it would be a great thesis for a grad student.

“Everyone is an expert on everything.” Got a link to that “fact?” Because of Google?

Go troll another post bro.  You are repetitive and tiring.  Again you offer nothing but wanting to argue.

Try to “prove your point,” yo.

You really don’t stop do you?  This post is made from social observations.  As much as you would like me to debat that with you, it’s a social observation that I’ve noticed and apparently others have.  Again if you want to troll, go find another thread.  If you want to offer some insight as to why you don’t think it’s true, then share your insight.  Otherwise your comments at least from me will be ignored, such as I’ve ignored them on other threads.  

Okay then, that’s a start. If I had said all gun owners are murderers you’d jump up my ass. So, you claiming everyone is dumbed down because of the Internet, and as such, has lead to political polarization to a degree that we can’t find common ground? I call bullshit. Certainly there’s a degree of stupidity out there but in general, there has never been an age where so much information has been available to the greatest percentage of our worlds population and as such, the “white” world order is being upended. I haven’t been dumbed down because of misinformation on the interwebs because I’m capable of critical thought. And most of the world is as well except for Team Trump Treason’s MAGA.

if you don’t want to debate, get off the debate page.
 

I never jumped your ass on the gun debate, I simply called you out on childish responses and did not engage with you anymore, because just like here; you are coming across as childish.  Not sure where the Trump or MAGA is coming from.  But if that’s your hang up, good for you.  Atleast we all now know where you are coming from and your inability to talk with the grown ups.  I guess ignoring you really ate at you and got under your skin.  I did not know I was living rent free in your mind.  But it’s going to happen again here.  

Halifax2TheMax

mattsl1983 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

mattsl1983 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

mattsl1983 said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

mattsl1983 said:

Is google and the fact that you can did any information possible to support what you think is right making the world more decisive?

I had an interesting discussion tonight with a couple of friends and the subject of surface knowledge came up.  Now it seems everyone is an expert on everything.  They have read one article and are now an expert.  

I guess going back to my college days and actually learning how to research and fact check are days of the past.  We would get assigned a subject and a side and you had to make sure your facts were right.  Today it seems those are practices of the past.

I guess my question, especially now in the world we live in, do you think this surface knowledge has contributed to where American culture is now, the divide and none budging sides?  The debates here on this forum that jump from random article to personal beliefs to an article that supports those beliefs?  It seems everyone is an expert and the art of actual debate is gone.  Sidestep something you don’t want to answer, sidestep something you can’t answer, shift to a point you want to make.  

Anyways, thoughts, opinions?  I think it would be a great thesis for a grad student.

“Everyone is an expert on everything.” Got a link to that “fact?” Because of Google?

Go troll another post bro.  You are repetitive and tiring.  Again you offer nothing but wanting to argue.

Try to “prove your point,” yo.

You really don’t stop do you?  This post is made from social observations.  As much as you would like me to debat that with you, it’s a social observation that I’ve noticed and apparently others have.  Again if you want to troll, go find another thread.  If you want to offer some insight as to why you don’t think it’s true, then share your insight.  Otherwise your comments at least from me will be ignored, such as I’ve ignored them on other threads.  

Okay then, that’s a start. If I had said all gun owners are murderers you’d jump up my ass. So, you claiming everyone is dumbed down because of the Internet, and as such, has lead to political polarization to a degree that we can’t find common ground? I call bullshit. Certainly there’s a degree of stupidity out there but in general, there has never been an age where so much information has been available to the greatest percentage of our worlds population and as such, the “white” world order is being upended. I haven’t been dumbed down because of misinformation on the interwebs because I’m capable of critical thought. And most of the world is as well except for Team Trump Treason’s MAGA.

if you don’t want to debate, get off the debate page.
 

I never jumped your ass on the gun debate, I simply called you out on childish responses and did not engage with you anymore, because just like here; you are coming across as childish.  Not sure where the Trump or MAGA is coming from.  But if that’s your hang up, good for you.  Atleast we all now know where you are coming from and your inability to talk with the grown ups.  I guess ignoring you really ate at you and got under your skin.  I did not know I was living rent free in your mind.  But it’s going to happen again here.  

Would you like to debate the topic you posted or revisit the past? Wow wow wow hold on a minute? Did you insult me? Omg! Your reading comprehension is off, go back, read. I made an anology. As in, if I made a blanket statement about gun owners as you did about the dumbed down average information consumer, you’d give me or anyone else who claimed the same, shit.

so, do you want to grow up and debate your premise?
 

benjs

Matt,

I think I agree with you. 

First, look at the prevalence of surface knowledge articles’ popularity: corporations pay top dollar to have a spot on peoples’ Facebook walls, and those prices hold, so it can be assumed there are indications that these spots have impact on readers’ opinions.

Next, look at the logic void in high-visibility debates. Logical fallacies galore, sound byte statistics dropped to aggrandize or diminish situation significance through shock in eight seconds or less, are signs that the citizenry is highly responsive to low- or no-logic discussions.

While I don’t know if the polarization of political opinions is uniquely or primarily caused by this phenomenon, it’d be hard to argue this doesn’t have an impact for this simple reason: companies and politicians who wish to change political opinions to create polarization are delivering surface knowledge on an increasing (not flat or downward) basis and seeing high-value returns on their investments. 

Halifax2TheMax

benjs said:

Matt,

I think I agree with you. 

First, look at the prevalence of surface knowledge articles’ popularity: corporations pay top dollar to have a spot on peoples’ Facebook walls, and those prices hold, so it can be assumed there are indications that these spots have impact on readers’ opinions.

Next, look at the logic void in high-visibility debates. Logical fallacies galore, sound byte statistics dropped to aggrandize or diminish situation significance through shock in eight seconds or less, are signs that the citizenry is highly responsive to low- or no-logic discussions.

While I don’t know if the polarization of political opinions is uniquely or primarily caused by this phenomenon, it’d be hard to argue this doesn’t have an impact for this simple reason: companies and politicians who wish to change political opinions to create polarization are delivering surface knowledge on an increasing (not flat or downward) basis and seeing high-value returns on their investments. 

Lemme see the lemmings, because they all fall off the cliff.  Basically? Your agreeing with Team Mueller. I look forward to y’all voting for conviction after impeachment.

benjs

Halifax2TheMax said:

benjs said:

Matt,

I think I agree with you. 

First, look at the prevalence of surface knowledge articles’ popularity: corporations pay top dollar to have a spot on peoples’ Facebook walls, and those prices hold, so it can be assumed there are indications that these spots have impact on readers’ opinions.

Next, look at the logic void in high-visibility debates. Logical fallacies galore, sound byte statistics dropped to aggrandize or diminish situation significance through shock in eight seconds or less, are signs that the citizenry is highly responsive to low- or no-logic discussions.

While I don’t know if the polarization of political opinions is uniquely or primarily caused by this phenomenon, it’d be hard to argue this doesn’t have an impact for this simple reason: companies and politicians who wish to change political opinions to create polarization are delivering surface knowledge on an increasing (not flat or downward) basis and seeing high-value returns on their investments. 

Lemme see the lemmings, because they all fall off the cliff.  Basically? Your agreeing with Team Mueller. I look forward to y’all voting for conviction after impeachment.

Do what you want with others’ words, but don’t distort mine. I didn’t mention one political party or corporation or insinuate my positions in any way, shape, or form; so don’t tell me where my allegiances reside. If you feel I do that to you - call me out.

Also, I thought you requested logic to validate Matt’s argument to debate. Have I lacked logic? Why don’t you debate that instead of calling me a lemming?

mfc2006

I try to see all sides. That being said, it would be nice to just see the surface every now and again, but that can’t (and won’t) happen. Thanks, fuckface....I mean President fuckface.

Halifax2TheMax

benjs said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

benjs said:

Matt,

I think I agree with you. 

First, look at the prevalence of surface knowledge articles’ popularity: corporations pay top dollar to have a spot on peoples’ Facebook walls, and those prices hold, so it can be assumed there are indications that these spots have impact on readers’ opinions.

Next, look at the logic void in high-visibility debates. Logical fallacies galore, sound byte statistics dropped to aggrandize or diminish situation significance through shock in eight seconds or less, are signs that the citizenry is highly responsive to low- or no-logic discussions.

While I don’t know if the polarization of political opinions is uniquely or primarily caused by this phenomenon, it’d be hard to argue this doesn’t have an impact for this simple reason: companies and politicians who wish to change political opinions to create polarization are delivering surface knowledge on an increasing (not flat or downward) basis and seeing high-value returns on their investments. 

Lemme see the lemmings, because they all fall off the cliff.  Basically? Your agreeing with Team Mueller. I look forward to y’all voting for conviction after impeachment.

Do what you want with others’ words, but don’t distort mine. I didn’t mention one political party or corporation or insinuate my positions in any way, shape, or form; so don’t tell me where my allegiances reside. If you feel I do that to you - call me out.

Also, I thought you requested logic to validate Matt’s argument to debate. Have I lacked logic? Why don’t you debate that instead of calling me a lemming?

Feeling a little sensitive there Benjs? How did I distortbyour words? I didn’t manipulate them or alter them. I interpreted them in my way. As such, social media, with its speed, ability, content, nefariousness even, results in the masses being duped? About right?  Did I call you a lemming? 

But it that’s what you want to blame all the “anxiety “on? Everyone is “too dumb “ sucked in and tuned out? Really? Only in America.

benjs

Halifax2TheMax said:

benjs said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

benjs said:

Matt,

I think I agree with you. 

First, look at the prevalence of surface knowledge articles’ popularity: corporations pay top dollar to have a spot on peoples’ Facebook walls, and those prices hold, so it can be assumed there are indications that these spots have impact on readers’ opinions.

Next, look at the logic void in high-visibility debates. Logical fallacies galore, sound byte statistics dropped to aggrandize or diminish situation significance through shock in eight seconds or less, are signs that the citizenry is highly responsive to low- or no-logic discussions.

While I don’t know if the polarization of political opinions is uniquely or primarily caused by this phenomenon, it’d be hard to argue this doesn’t have an impact for this simple reason: companies and politicians who wish to change political opinions to create polarization are delivering surface knowledge on an increasing (not flat or downward) basis and seeing high-value returns on their investments. 

Lemme see the lemmings, because they all fall off the cliff.  Basically? Your agreeing with Team Mueller. I look forward to y’all voting for conviction after impeachment.

Do what you want with others’ words, but don’t distort mine. I didn’t mention one political party or corporation or insinuate my positions in any way, shape, or form; so don’t tell me where my allegiances reside. If you feel I do that to you - call me out.

Also, I thought you requested logic to validate Matt’s argument to debate. Have I lacked logic? Why don’t you debate that instead of calling me a lemming?

Feeling a little sensitive there Benjs? How did I distortbyour words? I didn’t manipulate them or alter them. I interpreted them in my way. As such, social media, with its speed, ability, content, nefariousness even, results in the masses being duped? About right?  Did I call you a lemming? 

But it that’s what you want to blame all the “anxiety “on? Everyone is “too dumb “ sucked in and tuned out? Really? Only in America.

Yes, I’m sensitive about honest representation. Is honesty something you value, or are you regularly comfortable filling in blanks on others’ behalves as you’ve shown here? 

First - blame “all” of something on this topic? Don’t you read? I literally said that this is not uniquely and probably not primarily the cause of this new reality.

Next, your mention of my agreement with Team Mueller is certainly misrepresentation of my position, as I mentioned no political actors whatsoever. As I said in the first of two paragraphs that you responded to. To reiterate - don’t you read?

Halifax2TheMax

benjs said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

benjs said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

benjs said:

Matt,

I think I agree with you. 

First, look at the prevalence of surface knowledge articles’ popularity: corporations pay top dollar to have a spot on peoples’ Facebook walls, and those prices hold, so it can be assumed there are indications that these spots have impact on readers’ opinions.

Next, look at the logic void in high-visibility debates. Logical fallacies galore, sound byte statistics dropped to aggrandize or diminish situation significance through shock in eight seconds or less, are signs that the citizenry is highly responsive to low- or no-logic discussions.

While I don’t know if the polarization of political opinions is uniquely or primarily caused by this phenomenon, it’d be hard to argue this doesn’t have an impact for this simple reason: companies and politicians who wish to change political opinions to create polarization are delivering surface knowledge on an increasing (not flat or downward) basis and seeing high-value returns on their investments. 

Lemme see the lemmings, because they all fall off the cliff.  Basically? Your agreeing with Team Mueller. I look forward to y’all voting for conviction after impeachment.

Do what you want with others’ words, but don’t distort mine. I didn’t mention one political party or corporation or insinuate my positions in any way, shape, or form; so don’t tell me where my allegiances reside. If you feel I do that to you - call me out.

Also, I thought you requested logic to validate Matt’s argument to debate. Have I lacked logic? Why don’t you debate that instead of calling me a lemming?

Feeling a little sensitive there Benjs? How did I distortbyour words? I didn’t manipulate them or alter them. I interpreted them in my way. As such, social media, with its speed, ability, content, nefariousness even, results in the masses being duped? About right?  Did I call you a lemming? 

But it that’s what you want to blame all the “anxiety “on? Everyone is “too dumb “ sucked in and tuned out? Really? Only in America.

Yes, I’m sensitive about honest representation. Is honesty something you value, or are you regularly comfortable filling in blanks on others’ behalves as you’ve shown here? 

First - blame “all” of something on this topic? Don’t you read? I literally said that this is not uniquely and probably not primarily the cause of this new reality.

Next, your mention of my agreement with Team Mueller is certainly misrepresentation of my position, as I mentioned no political actors whatsoever. As I said in the first of two paragraphs that you responded to. To reiterate - don’t you read?

First, to your sensitivity (my punctuation might help, but maybe not): Honesty is the cornerstone of democracy and debate, do you question my sincerity? I’ve been accused of blanket statements and vilified for such. I’ve always been honest in my approach and have never been sensitive to criticism. Other than to see and realize the apologists for our current state look every where else but where it resides. I find that amusing.

 

Halifax2TheMax

benjs said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

benjs said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

benjs said:

Matt,

I think I agree with you. 

First, look at the prevalence of surface knowledge articles’ popularity: corporations pay top dollar to have a spot on peoples’ Facebook walls, and those prices hold, so it can be assumed there are indications that these spots have impact on readers’ opinions.

Next, look at the logic void in high-visibility debates. Logical fallacies galore, sound byte statistics dropped to aggrandize or diminish situation significance through shock in eight seconds or less, are signs that the citizenry is highly responsive to low- or no-logic discussions.

While I don’t know if the polarization of political opinions is uniquely or primarily caused by this phenomenon, it’d be hard to argue this doesn’t have an impact for this simple reason: companies and politicians who wish to change political opinions to create polarization are delivering surface knowledge on an increasing (not flat or downward) basis and seeing high-value returns on their investments. 

Lemme see the lemmings, because they all fall off the cliff.  Basically? Your agreeing with Team Mueller. I look forward to y’all voting for conviction after impeachment.

Do what you want with others’ words, but don’t distort mine. I didn’t mention one political party or corporation or insinuate my positions in any way, shape, or form; so don’t tell me where my allegiances reside. If you feel I do that to you - call me out.

Also, I thought you requested logic to validate Matt’s argument to debate. Have I lacked logic? Why don’t you debate that instead of calling me a lemming?

Feeling a little sensitive there Benjs? How did I distortbyour words? I didn’t manipulate them or alter them. I interpreted them in my way. As such, social media, with its speed, ability, content, nefariousness even, results in the masses being duped? About right?  Did I call you a lemming? 

But it that’s what you want to blame all the “anxiety “on? Everyone is “too dumb “ sucked in and tuned out? Really? Only in America.

Yes, I’m sensitive about honest representation. Is honesty something you value, or are you regularly comfortable filling in blanks on others’ behalves as you’ve shown here? 

First - blame “all” of something on this topic? Don’t you read? I literally said that this is not uniquely and probably not primarily the cause of this new reality.

Next, your mention of my agreement with Team Mueller is certainly misrepresentation of my position, as I mentioned no political actors whatsoever. As I said in the first of two paragraphs that you responded to. To reiterate - don’t you read?

But as you questioned it (second paragraph) you make it sound as if there’s no thought, due to all the chatter (social media), and yet, if I recall, you, and others, were dismissive of the impact of chatter on elections? And now? Suddenly it’s an “influence?” Really?

brianlux

This thread went from a great start to a disaster.  What the fuck is going on here? 

Halifax2TheMax

Oh come on benjs, fuck, you can’t take it personal and posit theories and then deny there’s some alignment or not. 

So, all this web based misunderstanding by the masses or manipulation for profit has resulted in Team trump Treason? Or, we’re all lemmings? 

mattsl1983

brianlux said:

This thread went from a great start to a disaster.  What the fuck is going on here? 

I agree, guess I should have pointed out it’s not political?  I don’t know...  Sadly I think this is the world we live in now.