![](/i/fill.gif) |
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
http://www.cracked.com/article_16656_6-brainwashing-techniques-theyre-using-on-you-right-now.html
--
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.freesitespace.net
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Tim Cook wrote:
>
http://www.cracked.com/article_16656_6-brainwashing-techniques-theyre-using-on-you-right-now.html
http://people.csail.mit.edu/rahimi/helmet/
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Tim Cook <z99### [at] gmail com> wrote:
>
http://www.cracked.com/article_16656_6-brainwashing-techniques-theyre-using-on-you-right-now.html
Those explain pretty well why some logical fallacies work.
When you read about logical fallacies in an article discussing about them
(eg. at wikipedia), you usually think that they are so ridiculous and so
easy to spot that you would never fall from them. However, if you think
that, you are greatly underestimating how your brain works. When you are
reading the article, the context is completely different than when experts
manipulate you into thinking how they want.
It wouldn't be the first time that intelligent, rational, highly educated,
critically-thinking, unbiased, non-radical people have been convinced of
bullshit by simply laying out the bullshit properly to them. If you analyze
how the bullshit has been laid out, you will notice many of the fallacies
described above, and others. They have simply been very cleverly masked.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Warp wrote:
> Tim Cook <z99### [at] gmail com> wrote:
>>
http://www.cracked.com/article_16656_6-brainwashing-techniques-theyre-using-on-you-right-now.html
>
> Those explain pretty well why some logical fallacies work.
>
> When you read about logical fallacies in an article discussing about them
> (eg. at wikipedia), you usually think that they are so ridiculous and so
> easy to spot that you would never fall from them. However, if you think
> that, you are greatly underestimating how your brain works. When you are
> reading the article, the context is completely different than when experts
> manipulate you into thinking how they want.
>
> It wouldn't be the first time that intelligent, rational, highly educated,
> critically-thinking, unbiased, non-radical people have been convinced of
> bullshit by simply laying out the bullshit properly to them. If you analyze
> how the bullshit has been laid out, you will notice many of the fallacies
> described above, and others. They have simply been very cleverly masked.
>
Reminds me of three things, this recently article:
http://scienceblogs.com/denialism/2009/05/how_do_we_break_this_cycle.php
and its follow up:
http://scienceblogs.com/denialism/2009/05/nhs_has_broken_the_cycle.php
and, more to the point, the bloggers entire line of "Denialist Deck of
Cards":
http://scienceblogs.com/denialism/deck.php
Its undeniable that people get "stuck" in tribalism, but, sometimes the
tribe can be more right anyway. A good example being the place I post
at. There was a recent article on the whole nonsense of Liberty
University, being **very** unliberal college(see, this is a perfect
example of the same thing, hardline, generally anti-any other opinions,
using terms like "liberty", to appear to be the "good guys", when
presenting their vision of who is right an wrong), by banning the very
existence of Democrats (or at least any official recognition of the
party are either being Christian, or playing by the same moral rules as
Liberty does). Some where in the process of discussing this, someone
showed up to whine about those on the blog being "unfair" to ID
proponents, LU being pretty much the only college in the universe that
actually thinks it qualifies as either science, or a course of study.
Rather than deal with the implication that neither the other posters,
nor the blogger have ever "read" any ID literature, never mind just
pointing at even a few of the posts the blogger himself actually wrote
that described what such books said, and how they got things horrible
wrong (or not even wrong, as in, not even in the same universe, never
mind ball park as the thing being supposedly written about), most of the
posters fell into a pattern of name calling, and telling the guy to shut up.
Frankly, its counter productive. Mind, its also a lot fracking easier
than pointing out to the 43rd twit in a month that, yes, we do read the
books, no, they don't correctly describe the science, no, irreducibility
isn't impossible without someone "intentionally" designing it, and no,
taking other people's work, getting most of everything they said in the
original published paper wrong, reinterpreting your misinterpretation to
imply what you want, then publishing an article in a Home and Garden
magazine, or some silly place, warbling about how it "really" proves
your view, or writing some long winded whine about how unfair scientists
are, and how some wildly insane nonsense, which doesn't even get basic
math right, proves ID, as a book, doesn't constitute **research**. But,
it still ends up being nothing but a crowd, mostly all shouting, "You
are an idiot, go away, or shut up!"
Its possible to be right, and still fall pray to this kind of stupidity.
It doesn't make you less of a fool for failing to recognize it.
That said, one example used is the "MAC vs. PC" thing. And, its a poor
example. Most of the people I have seen comment on it, from either side,
have said, "It makes some good points, but gets others wrong." Just how
much it gets wrong, and which points, may differ between camps, but even
the MAC camp are honest enough to admit that some of it is pure, and
total BS. Now.. What I have seen from the PC side... I am not sure what
the ratio is, but I tend to suspect that, based on observation, as
someone that uses PCs all the time, but hates them, but hasn't owned
anything like a MAC since the MAC II, in general, the PC camp has a much
higher dose of people that fall for nearly "every" bad argument that MS
or one of their advocates make, fail to check the facts at all, and
wouldn't be convinced is the show indicated that PCs tended to catch
fire, and they where using a fire extinguisher to put their's out, while
"watching" the commercial. But, that is just an outside opinion on what
I see being argued by some of the self claimed "experts", MS paid or
not, that advocate for PCs...
--
void main () {
if version = "Vista" {
call slow_by_half();
call DRM_everything();
}
call functional_code();
}
else
call crash_windows();
}
<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Tim Cook <z99### [at] gmail com> wrote:
>
http://www.cracked.com/article_16656_6-brainwashing-techniques-theyre-using-on-you-right-now.html
Btw, this comic strip talks about, what it calls, professional strawmen:
http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=1384
In other words, someone who has been secretly hired by some political
party (or, I imagine, by some company wanting to push through some view)
to participate in a debate as presenting a view opposing that party, but
deliberately losing the debate.
I wonder if this happens in real life. It doesn't sound at all far-fetched.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Tim Cook wrote:
>
http://www.cracked.com/article_16656_6-brainwashing-techniques-theyre-using-on-you-right-now.html
That's obviously a propaganda piece to keep your mind from searching
how they actually brainwash you. Isn't it obvious? Especially given the
poor quality of Cracked articles in general?
--
Mary had a little lamb, a little beef, and a little ham.
/\ /\ /\ /
/ \/ \ u e e n / \/ a w a z
>>>>>>mue### [at] nawaz org<<<<<<
anl
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> http://people.csail.mit.edu/rahimi/helmet/
Did you notice they switched from making tin foil to making aluminum foil
right after that space ship crash in Roswell?
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
There's no CD like OCD, there's no CD I knoooow!
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Warp wrote:
> I wonder if this happens in real life. It doesn't sound at all far-fetched.
If it didn't used to happen, it will now, as soon as someone who would hire
such a person sees the comic.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
There's no CD like OCD, there's no CD I knoooow!
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Warp wrote:
> It wouldn't be the first time that intelligent, rational, highly educated,
> critically-thinking, unbiased, non-radical people have been convinced of
> bullshit by simply laying out the bullshit properly to them. If you analyze
> how the bullshit has been laid out, you will notice many of the fallacies
> described above, and others. They have simply been very cleverly masked.
Controlling What You Watch and Read.
This is the one that I often see most really intelligent people suffer
from. "Ordinary" people I've found to fall for lots of logical
fallacies, and it doesn't surprise me. But when someone supremely
intelligent (i.e. as intelligent as I<G>) starts saying incoherent stuff
about some topic, and demonstrating an intelligence that a 3rd grader
would laugh at, it bothers me and I spend (or used to) a lot of time
trying to figure out why he's acting this way. Inevitably the reason is
this - they would get only one viewpoint from whatever sources they look
at, and over years it's repeated continually. That viewpoint never gets
challenged.
I know it sounds simple the way I wrote it, but this actually
worries/scares me about _myself_. Every time I see one of these people,
I really worry that I may fall/have fallen into the same trap, and
perhaps need to broaden my inputs (reading stuff, watching stuff, etc).
I now quite believe that _anyone_ will fall for this, no matter how
intelligent (or rather, the only way not to fall for it is by being
impractical and questioning everything continually in life). I'm not
sure the human mind can be as critical continually of something if it
constantly only gets the same kind of input.
I should clarify. Often it's not others controlling what you watch/read
(although that probably does play a role). It's simply the person
himself. These days (at least in the US), the issue of newspapers going
out of business is often, well, in the news. It worries many -
particularly seasoned journalists - and not because they're worried they
won't have a job. What we're seeing with the Internet based news is that
people tend to read only the stuff that just repeats back to them their
own views. Most online news sources have a serious slant in some
direction, and cater almost purely to that group. With good newspapers
(especially physical ones), you'd get news articles that could challenge
your world view considerably. And while many still don't read them, the
fact that one simply skims the headlines can make a big difference.
You're at least _exposed_ to articles that challenge your views.
--
Mary had a little lamb, a little beef, and a little ham.
/\ /\ /\ /
/ \/ \ u e e n / \/ a w a z
>>>>>>mue### [at] nawaz org<<<<<<
anl
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |