tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19305198.post6075394427883539584..comments2024-03-27T03:19:11.216-04:00Comments on Assistant Village Idiot: Jonathan Haidt UpdateAssistant Village Idiothttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01978011985085795099noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19305198.post-91480991556033505902021-06-10T17:37:52.830-04:002021-06-10T17:37:52.830-04:00Assistant Village Idiot: As you see, he is unable ...<b>Assistant Village Idiot</b>: <i>As you see, he is unable to perceive, or at least acknowledge, that there is </i>any possible other understanding<i> of the issue other than the one he holds, regardless of what information you put forward. </i><br /><br />We're quite aware of other views. However, not all views have equal support. <br /><br />There is a process in place for adjudicated such claims, such as audits, recounts, and the judicial process, all the way up to the Supreme Court. The courts were never presented any evidence of significant voter fraud. Indeed, ruralcounsel admits as much when he refers to the "entrenched oligarchy that refuses still to investigate." In other words, the evidence is out there, somewhere thither, someplace over there.Zachrielhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16081260898264733380noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19305198.post-35352407406397896142021-06-10T17:04:25.764-04:002021-06-10T17:04:25.764-04:00@ ruralcounsel - this is an excellent example of w...@ ruralcounsel - this is an excellent example of why I do not recommend engaging Zachriel at all. As you see, he is unable to perceive, or at least acknowledge, that there is <i>any possible other understanding</i> of the issue other than the one he holds, regardless of what information you put forward.Assistant Village Idiothttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01978011985085795099noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19305198.post-50660230387087441252021-06-10T16:48:57.841-04:002021-06-10T16:48:57.841-04:00ruralcounsel: No, they were striking at a transiti...<b>ruralcounsel</b>: <i>No, they were striking at a transition of power that violated the principles of democratic transfer of power. </i><br /><br />The attack was intended to prevent the legal transfer of power by a duly elected Congress, after an open election with audits, recounts, and judicial oversight. Not sure how much more of a direct attack on democracy it could be.Zachrielhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16081260898264733380noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19305198.post-63029202795468566712021-06-10T16:28:07.069-04:002021-06-10T16:28:07.069-04:00"... the storming of the Capitol was by those..."... the storming of the Capitol was by those higher on the social scale and struck at the very transition of power that exemplifies the democratic transfer of power."<br /><br />No, they were striking at a transition of power that violated the principles of democratic transfer of power. And an entrenched oligarchy that refuses still to investigate.ruralcounselhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09193188081686431709noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19305198.post-41727073671607863532021-05-29T11:42:01.704-04:002021-05-29T11:42:01.704-04:00Assistant Village Idiot: But few of us do science,...<b>Assistant Village Idiot</b>: <i>But few of us do science, so we are left with trusting </i>scientists, <br /><br />That's correct. An appeal to authority is valid when<br /><br /> * The cited authority has sufficient expertise.<br /> * The authority is making a statement within their area of expertise.<br /> * The area of expertise is a valid field of study.<br /> * There is adequate agreement among authorities in the field.<br /> * There is no evidence of undue bias.<br /><br /> The proper argument against a valid appeal to authority is to the evidence.<br /><br /><b>Assistant Village Idiot</b>: <i>or more often, people who claim they are speaking for scientists.</i><br /><br />As with an expert appeal to authority, you would have to evaluate the claim by reference to scientific consensus, even then, the consensus could be wrong. But simply saying it's could be wrong is not much of an argument unless you quantify the degree of scientific uncertainty. <br /><br /><b>Assistant Village Idiot</b>: <i>And the foundation of that is accepting the credentialing from universities plus their employment for organisations that are highly politicised. </i><br /><br />Credentially is not how scientific findings are made. It's not the individual scientist, but the findings of the scientific community as a whole that carry an appeal to authority. <br /><br /><b>Assistant Village Idiot</b>: <i>Obeying social conventions is also a form of accepting authority. </i><br /><br />Sure, and a very astute observation. Traditional institutions exist for a reason. Sometimes the reasons a fence was erected have become outmoded, but it would behoove one to understand those reasons before tearing down the fence.<br /><br /><b>Assistant Village Idiot</b>: <i>He just knows without thinking that those riots were different things, somehow. </i><br /><br />They were different. The BLM campaign was primarily conducted by people lower on the social scale hoping to enact political change, while the storming of the Capitol was by those higher on the social scale and struck at the very transition of power that exemplifies the democratic transfer of power.Zachrielhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16081260898264733380noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19305198.post-44699499030515720972021-05-28T14:01:19.718-04:002021-05-28T14:01:19.718-04:00A SWAG but as an interviewer I think she might hav...A SWAG but as an interviewer I think she might have been giving Haidt the opening to tell her what she, and her audience, wanted to hear.Christopher Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00396671757183163171noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19305198.post-75904801575821703302021-05-28T13:09:31.169-04:002021-05-28T13:09:31.169-04:00Hmm. It didn't feel that way at the time, it ...Hmm. It didn't feel that way at the time, it felt like "These people are so beyond the pale that I can't even imagine what is in their heads," but maybe you are on to something.Assistant Village Idiothttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01978011985085795099noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19305198.post-66077047023233568472021-05-28T12:39:30.711-04:002021-05-28T12:39:30.711-04:00His interviewer was clearly liberal who admitted s...<i>His interviewer was clearly liberal who admitted she could not even fathom the moral reasoning of others. </i><br /><br />That's an interesting admission. How did she frame it? Generally I hear the assumption stated as a firm belief that they do fathom the moral reasoning of others, which they affirm to be terrible/racist/sexist/whatever. Admitting that you just don't understand how they could come to their conclusions is a step forward, maybe.Grimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07543082562999855432noreply@blogger.com