Denying the Existence of Denialism

originally posted by: Blaine91555
a reply to: ketsuko
I don't think we find truth by using those who tell us what to think as resources. Real conspiracy is rooted out through hard work and searching in unlikely, but mainstream places. We don't see much of that anymore.

Not only that, but there is a tendency these days to simply accept the conspiracy, but rather than being horrified or enraged by it, people just shrug. "Oh, really, the CIA killed JFK Jr. so he would never run for President? Well, duh. Of course they did."

a reply to: Blue Shift

Exactly

Facts are not a choice but facts can be distorted by whatever filter they pass through. They can also be distorted at the source. IOW, someone else's lens can distort the truth and you may not ever know the difference if it's done just right.

If you order a glass of water and the guy in the back spits in your water and brings it to you, are you ever going to know if it actually doesn't look like there's anything but water in there?

a reply to: DoctorBluechip

Uh , so , I , er , am in Denial for Not Believing in Denialism ? I Refuse to Except that Possible Reality in my Personal Life . I Think I'll Create a BETTER One , Exceptionalism ! ..............................)

a reply to: DoctorBluechip

Facts are now selectable , there's a difference .

You can only select your facts if you see them as being available as a choice

Facts as salad bar are not facts

The tragedy for denialists is that they concede the argument in advance. Holocaust deniers’ attempts to deny that the Holocaust took place imply that it would not have been a good thing if it had. Climate change denialism is predicated on a similarly hidden acknowledgment that, if anthropogenic climate change were actually occurring, we would have to do something about it.

Denialism is therefore not just hard work – finding ways to discredit mountains of evidence is a tremendous labour – but also involves suppressing the expression of one’s desires. Denialists are “trapped” into byzantine modes of argument because they have few other options in pursuing their goals.

Your choice is as valid as mine - which is as valid as his...?

You're saying nothing is knowable

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

That facts are selectable does not necessarily mean that their selectors are making the wrong choices . That would simply be an implied assumption , a haughty condescending opinion in itself , which those thrusting denialism at us assume . We should just call them assumists if that's the level they want to play at .
We all get to assess possible and definite validity , but somehow the inventors of denialism get to assume things about peoples thoughts and motivations . They should ask questions more and less stating so called facts

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

Hmm . that Was a Exceptional Post ! Keep Up The Good Work !...)

a reply to: DoctorBluechip

What is a fact?

Just curious :-)

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

What isn't a fact ?

a reply to: DoctorBluechip

Quit dodging

What is a fact?

:-)

ETA: Heading out the door

I'm genuinely interested in your definition - of what a fact is, or isn't

Then we can talk about denialism

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

an objectively verifiable reality

a reply to: DoctorBluechip

See above

So - things can be knowable?

:-)

More tomorrow...

This entire situation was precipitated by those who feed the public half-baked theories on how and why certain events happened. By leaving huge gaps in logic they invite thoughtful people to further fill in those gaps. Some people have that need to know, not everyone by a longshot but there's always a few of us with that insatiable desire.

What a masterstroke to then ridicule those who follow logic in an attempt to answer the questions they intentionally leave unanswered.

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

"There are known knowns , known unknowns ,and unknown unknowns " - Donald Rumsfeld

All of these are facts. hasta la vista

a reply to: DoctorBluechip

Yes, one of my favorite philosophers - Donald Rumsfeld

I just reread your OP. Just so I understand - you're angry at one group of people for telling you your thinking isn't up to snuff?

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: DoctorBluechip
What is a fact?

Facts are what the majority of people say they are. Woe unto he who experiences a different reality, regardless of its truth.

a reply to: Blue Shift

Facts are what the majority of people say they are. Woe unto he who experiences a different reality, regardless of its truth.

Woe unto he. Or she. For their experience?

Regardless - of it's truth?

Separate realities can be cumbersome things - but they do make us feel special sometimes

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
Woe unto he. Or she. For their experience?

Because society doesn't take kindly to the insane, and in the old days - and even in some parts of the world these days - they liked to get rid of that person in the cruelest way possible. Hanging if you're lucky. Fire if you're not.

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

No I was rudely denying the existence of denialism to start a thread and share the reading . Its not like inventors of this concept can explain it in short simple language , and that's a primary indicator of a fallacious construct .
That's because its a manufactured systematization expecting to support bias towards belief in the mainstream version , and and undermine against our common userbase .

Second of all its such a base concept , that of negative and positive - if something deserves denial on objective grounds, it gets denied . Read the quote of the op - she wants to make subjective assumptions about some people's motives and she wants to presuppose their inferior intellect . Not mine per se , but anyone they feel like picking on , who 'denies' any given mainstream assertion (eg those with reservations about gm foods) . It sounds like something Monsanto might pay for too

I didnt understand the uncompromising nature of the replies. Looks unfair.