So you cherry pick and focus on the title of the content creator - a title - and disregard the science and research in the piece_...
the mind boggles.
Is there anything of any authority you don't believe - support?
ALL government have been proven to lie over the decades. All of them.
But you always choose to believe that perspective.Whatever a known liar - the institute of government - tells you...
Invisible bars, possibly? Gullible possibly?
Why would you choose to believe a proven liar over people that say things that have never lied to you?
Just askin' your logic..
I never believe proven liars personally, it sets you up for being lied to again...
You are right, one should not believe in anything because one is told it is true by a government. The only reason to believe something to be true is when presented with evidence that supports an idea, and provides models that continue to make accurate predictions of future events. Which is why we can know that the Earth is a sphere for example. Because I can tell you today that on the 26 May 2021 we will see a new total lunar eclipse (or often called "blood moon") that anyone can go out and witness. And because that prediction, which is accurate down to the exact day, relies fully on assuming that the Earth is round as well as the heliocentric model, I can know both of those to be true when my prediction turns out right.
You are right, one should not believe in anything because one is told it is true by a government.
From the people I know who display such a naive gullibility (believing known liars - what else can you call it?), it goes much deeper, psychologically speaking. (nothing proven just an observation over the years).
The need to feel secure with 'the authority'. It's a deeper fear based mechanism - that blinds to facts to maintain that feeling of 'being secure'.
Better the devil you know, an' all that.
To question the authority is to bring into question their own feelings of security...(and most people are pretty scared - even if they don't realize it)
I think everyone should always question any individual who claims to be an authority. It is true that we find a lot of comfort in feeling assured that we understand things, as not knowing, being uncertain, or doubting is often felt as unpleasant.
However, I think most of the time acknowledging that one does not know the answer(s), and managing to be fine with that, is very empowering and that level of intellectual honesty will help one make better decisions when not under the false illusion of having knowledge.
I'll add one of my own observations to yours, and would be curious to hear your thoughts on it, but I find most people who believe in common conspiracies to carry some of the same "feelings". Namely, that it seems to me that they are excited to feel that they have uncovered something that the vast majority have not. That they really want to believe that they are then somehow smarter than everyone else. More skeptical, more critical, etc. That seems to me to provide the same false positives, where people stick with something that they are not truly justified in believing nonetheless.
I think you are correct - to some degree - about the conspiracy crowd.
But (and it's a big 'but')....the tinfoil hat wearers, from JFK, to gulf of Ton kin incident, to Pearl Harbor, to Hiroshima, to USS Lusitania, to....you see my point?
History is littered with lies by 'authority'.
As time goes on, the more the 'conspiracy crowd' are vindicated....
Evidence would suggest the Con crowd are on the right path, and not the wrong one..
I wouldn't want to assign myself to any "crowd", but instead judge each question on its own merits and make up my own opinion. Most of the famous conspiracy theory communicators I see people link to on YouTube etc seem to me to rush any new story with the same confirmation bias, eager to be "the first" so that they can get their audience and keep a status among them as the ones "busting".
In any case, self-awareness of one's own biases combined with good critical thinking is what I think we all need, regardless of what different things we may currently believe.
I'm sorry, however it was a many thousand word article, and covered a vast topic, I'm just asking you to help me out seeing as you've read it already, and pick out a particular bit that we can debate on.
OK, so you send me a link with absolutely no explanation behind it, I then click on said link and see this immediately
How is somebody's own true feeling and opinion be scientific? Just because someone agrees with you does not make them right.
Cg
....you never read the article? seriously?
So you cherry pick and focus on the title of the content creator - a title - and disregard the science and research in the piece_...
the mind boggles.
Is there anything of any authority you don't believe - support?
ALL government have been proven to lie over the decades. All of them.
But you always choose to believe that perspective.Whatever a known liar - the institute of government - tells you...
Invisible bars, possibly? Gullible possibly?
Why would you choose to believe a proven liar over people that say things that have never lied to you?
Just askin' your logic..
I never believe proven liars personally, it sets you up for being lied to again...
You are right, one should not believe in anything because one is told it is true by a government. The only reason to believe something to be true is when presented with evidence that supports an idea, and provides models that continue to make accurate predictions of future events. Which is why we can know that the Earth is a sphere for example. Because I can tell you today that on the 26 May 2021 we will see a new total lunar eclipse (or often called "blood moon") that anyone can go out and witness. And because that prediction, which is accurate down to the exact day, relies fully on assuming that the Earth is round as well as the heliocentric model, I can know both of those to be true when my prediction turns out right.
From the people I know who display such a naive gullibility (believing known liars - what else can you call it?), it goes much deeper, psychologically speaking. (nothing proven just an observation over the years).
The need to feel secure with 'the authority'. It's a deeper fear based mechanism - that blinds to facts to maintain that feeling of 'being secure'.
Better the devil you know, an' all that.
To question the authority is to bring into question their own feelings of security...(and most people are pretty scared - even if they don't realize it)
I think everyone should always question any individual who claims to be an authority. It is true that we find a lot of comfort in feeling assured that we understand things, as not knowing, being uncertain, or doubting is often felt as unpleasant.
However, I think most of the time acknowledging that one does not know the answer(s), and managing to be fine with that, is very empowering and that level of intellectual honesty will help one make better decisions when not under the false illusion of having knowledge.
I'll add one of my own observations to yours, and would be curious to hear your thoughts on it, but I find most people who believe in common conspiracies to carry some of the same "feelings". Namely, that it seems to me that they are excited to feel that they have uncovered something that the vast majority have not. That they really want to believe that they are then somehow smarter than everyone else. More skeptical, more critical, etc. That seems to me to provide the same false positives, where people stick with something that they are not truly justified in believing nonetheless.
I think you are correct - to some degree - about the conspiracy crowd.
But (and it's a big 'but')....the tinfoil hat wearers, from JFK, to gulf of Ton kin incident, to Pearl Harbor, to Hiroshima, to USS Lusitania, to....you see my point?
History is littered with lies by 'authority'.
As time goes on, the more the 'conspiracy crowd' are vindicated....
Evidence would suggest the Con crowd are on the right path, and not the wrong one..
I wouldn't want to assign myself to any "crowd", but instead judge each question on its own merits and make up my own opinion. Most of the famous conspiracy theory communicators I see people link to on YouTube etc seem to me to rush any new story with the same confirmation bias, eager to be "the first" so that they can get their audience and keep a status among them as the ones "busting".
In any case, self-awareness of one's own biases combined with good critical thinking is what I think we all need, regardless of what different things we may currently believe.
I'm sorry, however it was a many thousand word article, and covered a vast topic, I'm just asking you to help me out seeing as you've read it already, and pick out a particular bit that we can debate on.
My apologies for being so glib.
Cg