New posts

Trump.

Dec. 21, 2019, 2:08 p.m.
Posts: 324
Joined: Nov. 23, 2002

Posted by: ReductiMat

How would you define a replicable science experiment to prove that being center is better based off an "unexplained scoring system" by a website that "does not reveal the people behind it, beyond the fact that it seems to be based in the United Kingdom?"

What if someone came up with a more transparent system that placed you right or left of centre?  Would you strive to change your views to fit that model?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Political_Compass

Oh the irony in that I just gave a somewhat similar answer to shogun...

There's non science experiment here, we're using language and the accepted definitions of various words and terms to help describe someone's political position. As an aside, it's one of the reasons I like Chompsky, he's excellent as using language to describe a situation/issue whether or not you agree with his political leaning. So in terms of the accepted definitions and norms, being centrist essentially means one has balance views between left and right. We don't necessarily need a website to tell us that, just and understanding of the various political themes. If there was a system that placed me more to the left or right (I did score left of centre on the compass btw) then I would be fine with that if it aligned with my political views and accepted definitions for those views. If a site called me strongly right for example then I would immediately have to question is as that would not line up with my understanding of what left/right mean. So I would first check how the site is defining those terms and then check that against the accepted definitions and finally my own. That would be your science experiment I suppose.

Maybe that's what getting the world and the political spectrum so fucked up these days, is that the appreciation for and understanding of language is slowly going into the shitter and people can't communicate anymore beyond basic terms that leave far too much ambiguity in what the speaker/writer is trying to say.

Dec. 21, 2019, 3:08 p.m.
Posts: 324
Joined: Nov. 23, 2002

Posted by: aShogunNamedMarcus

I thought you'd dissect the company versus corporation instead of focusing on private. Now you'll say you knew it was a private corp over an organization.

Oh ffs, look up the meaning of a corporation. It's a legal standing for an organization to be recognized as it's own entity which means that it's leaders are set apart or insulated from the business. Part of the reason of benefit to doing it is that is protects the leaders/owners from getting sued. For example let's say I run a business as a sole proprietorship and I do something that causes some sort of harm hardship to someone else. If they decide to sue my company for wrong doing and they win they if the company doesn't have any assets or not enough to cover the award they can take my own personal assets to cover the award. However, if my business is incorporated - a corporation - my personal assets cannot be seized to cover the award. Some people interpret this as a way for greasy companies to escape losing their money/assets if they get sued for shitty behaviour. Some people might also say that it's no surprise that an entity like the DNC would want to be incorporated.

I focused on what you actually said and I explained my reason for doing so. Now you want to shift the goal posts and insinuate I was doing something else or had different motives. This is exactly the type of bullshit behaviour that people can't stand about you. Most of us on here don't lie about shit or purposely misrepresent (troll) the discussion just to piss you off. Take off the everyone is out to get shogun conspiracy hat.

1. You make a related but somewhat ambiguous/unclear statement.
2. Someone calls you on it and gives you a reason why.
3. You respond with something is related but not the same as the original statement or go off on another tangent altogether
4. You then claim that we're the ones getting things wrong

This is what you do over and over and over again and it's why trying to debate stuff with you is fucking painful and why people give you shit so often. The only other conclusion I can come to is you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about or have such a narrow view that you simply cannot see anything beyond what you want to see or believe in. Either way have fun with it.

Dec. 21, 2019, 4:27 p.m.
Posts: 11297
Joined: June 4, 2008

Posted by: syncro

Posted by: ReductiMat

How would you define a replicable science experiment to prove that being center is better based off an "unexplained scoring system" by a website that "does not reveal the people behind it, beyond the fact that it seems to be based in the United Kingdom?"

What if someone came up with a more transparent system that placed you right or left of centre?  Would you strive to change your views to fit that model?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Political_Compass

Oh the irony in that I just gave a somewhat similar answer to shogun...

There's non science experiment here, we're using language and the accepted definitions of various words and terms to help describe someone's political position. As an aside, it's one of the reasons I like Chompsky, he's excellent as using language to describe a situation/issue whether or not you agree with his political leaning. So in terms of the accepted definitions and norms, being centrist essentially means one has balance views between left and right. We don't necessarily need a website to tell us that, just and understanding of the various political themes. If there was a system that placed me more to the left or right (I did score left of centre on the compass btw) then I would be fine with that if it aligned with my political views and accepted definitions for those views. If a site called me strongly right for example then I would immediately have to question is as that would not line up with my understanding of what left/right mean. So I would first check how the site is defining those terms and then check that against the accepted definitions and finally my own. That would be your science experiment I suppose.

Maybe that's what getting the world and the political spectrum so fucked up these days, is that the appreciation for and understanding of language is slowly going into the shitter and people can't communicate anymore beyond basic terms that leave far too much ambiguity in what the speaker/writer is trying to say.

* Chomsky

Do you fault him for his decidedly non-centrism in his politics?

Left/Right/Center labels are useful only if you wish to identify as an ambiguous ideal.

Make omnibus bills illegal and force politicians to defend their beliefs.  If they commit too many logical fallacies, their shock collar goes off.

Dec. 21, 2019, 5:57 p.m.
Posts: 324
Joined: Nov. 23, 2002

Posted by: ReductiMat

* Chomsky

Do you fault him for his decidedly non-centrism in his politics?

Left/Right/Center labels are useful only if you wish to identify as an ambiguous ideal.

Make omnibus bills illegal and force politicians to defend their beliefs. If they commit too many logical fallacies, their shock collar goes off.

Fault him? No, he's an individual and as such gets to choose what he believes in, just like you or me. In turn we get to criticize him if we choose. I was saying I like that he's a good communicator, not that I necessarily agree with his politics.

Disagree - we need to have some sort of labels or identifiers for concepts if we're going to debate them. Left/right/centre is simply the nomenclature we use, it could be centre/right/left for all I care. I don't care about the labels, I care about the polices the labels stand for. Again I think that's what makes Chompsky good, his use of language tends to be exacting.

ps - chompsky is something I often use in debating with a friend of mine for the aforementioned reasons, he's chomping through the vernacular, and it just tends to carry through everywhere else.

Oh and yes, I tend to agree on the omnibus bill thing. the only problem I see is that it has the potential to make passing legislation a horribly drawn out affair and hardly anything gets done.


 Last edited by: syncro on Dec. 21, 2019, 5:59 p.m., edited 1 time in total.
Dec. 21, 2019, 9:14 p.m.
Posts: 11297
Joined: June 4, 2008

Posted by: syncro

Posted by: ReductiMat

* Chomsky

Do you fault him for his decidedly non-centrism in his politics?

Left/Right/Center labels are useful only if you wish to identify as an ambiguous ideal.

Make omnibus bills illegal and force politicians to defend their beliefs. If they commit too many logical fallacies, their shock collar goes off.

Fault him? No, he's an individual and as such gets to choose what he believes in, just like you or me. In turn we get to criticize him if we choose. I was saying I like that he's a good communicator, not that I necessarily agree with his politics.

Disagree - we need to have some sort of labels or identifiers for concepts if we're going to debate them. Left/right/centre is simply the nomenclature we use, it could be centre/right/left for all I care. I don't care about the labels, I care about the polices the labels stand for. Again I think that's what makes Chompsky good, his use of language tends to be exacting.

ps - chompsky is something I often use in debating with a friend of mine for the aforementioned reasons, he's chomping through the vernacular, and it just tends to carry through everywhere else.

Oh and yes, I tend to agree on the omnibus bill thing. the only problem I see is that it has the potential to make passing legislation a horribly drawn out affair and hardly anything gets done.

Should we let the Chinese Government own our senior's homes?  But wait, what label do you ascribe yourself politically before you answer?

In what universe does that matter?

Every new person I meet I try my damnedest not to know how they lean and I just ask their opinions, otherwise a whole lot of fucking garbage gets in the way.


 Last edited by: ReductiMat on Dec. 22, 2019, 12:14 a.m., edited 2 times in total.
Reason: Kennnn is already yelling at me
Dec. 22, 2019, 8:27 a.m.
Posts: 324
Joined: Nov. 23, 2002

Posted by: ReductiMat

Should we let the Chinese Government own our senior's homes?  But wait, what label do you ascribe yourself politically before you answer?

In what universe does that matter?

Every new person I meet I try my damnedest not to know how they lean and I just ask their opinions, otherwise a whole lot of fucking garbage gets in the way.

How is that different from any other large corporation as long as they follow the provincial guidelines? 

The label thing was in reference to having a political discussion, so people can easily figure out where they stand, what their values are, etc. 

Sure that works for some people.

Dec. 22, 2019, 12:46 p.m.
Posts: 1923
Joined: May 23, 2006

Posted by: ReductiMat

Should we let the Chinese Government own our senior's homes?  

Oh god no. The Phillipinos are bad enough!

Dec. 22, 2019, 5:43 p.m.
Posts: 662
Joined: Nov. 6, 2006

Crooked Hillary, now Crazy Nancy. I think I’ve seen this one.

Dec. 22, 2019, 5:59 p.m.
Posts: 1923
Joined: May 23, 2006

Posted by: FLATCH

Crooked Hillary, now Crazy Nancy. I think I’ve seen this one.

Someone should primary her. She slimey.

https://www.truthdig.com/articles/ralph-nader-democrats-have-no-excuse-for-backing-trumps-budget-deal/


 Last edited by: tungsten on Dec. 23, 2019, 10:02 a.m., edited 1 time in total.
Dec. 23, 2019, 9:03 a.m.
Posts: 10389
Joined: June 29, 2006

Posted by: tungsten

Posted by: FLATCH

Crooked Hillary, now Crazy Nancy. I think I’ve seen this one.

Someone should primary her. She slimey.

LOL.  She wins by massive margins.  She gets around 80% of the vote.  I don't think she is worried about getting primaried.

Dec. 23, 2019, 9:22 a.m.
Posts: 1923
Joined: May 23, 2006

Too bad. Told my sisiter I'd burn her house down if she voted for her again.

Now, for some genuine madnesss....... https://twitter.com/i/status/1208916201205833728

Dec. 23, 2019, 11:10 a.m.
Posts: 1372
Joined: Feb. 26, 2015

Ladies and gentlemen.

Full retard

https://earther.gizmodo.com/president-gravybrain-says-a-bunch-of-truly-bizarre-shit-1840607633

Dec. 23, 2019, 11:27 a.m.
Posts: 13834
Joined: Dec. 30, 2002

Posted by: syncro

Posted by: aShogunNamedMarcus

I thought you'd dissect the company versus corporation instead of focusing on private. Now you'll say you knew it was a private corp over an organization.

Oh ffs, look up the meaning of a corporation. It's a legal standing for an organization to be recognized as it's own entity which means that it's leaders are set apart or insulated from the business. Part of the reason of benefit to doing it is that is protects the leaders/owners from getting sued. For example let's say I run a business as a sole proprietorship and I do something that causes some sort of harm hardship to someone else. If they decide to sue my company for wrong doing and they win they if the company doesn't have any assets or not enough to cover the award they can take my own personal assets to cover the award. However, if my business is incorporated - a corporation - my personal assets cannot be seized to cover the award. Some people interpret this as a way for greasy companies to escape losing their money/assets if they get sued for shitty behaviour. Some people might also say that it's no surprise that an entity like the DNC would want to be incorporated.

I focused on what you actually said and I explained my reason for doing so. Now you want to shift the goal posts and insinuate I was doing something else or had different motives. This is exactly the type of bullshit behaviour that people can't stand about you. Most of us on here don't lie about shit or purposely misrepresent (troll) the discussion just to piss you off. Take off the everyone is out to get shogun conspiracy hat.

1. You make a related but somewhat ambiguous/unclear statement.
2. Someone calls you on it and gives you a reason why.
3. You respond with something is related but not the same as the original statement or go off on another tangent altogether
4. You then claim that we're the ones getting things wrong

This is what you do over and over and over again and it's why trying to debate stuff with you is fucking painful and why people give you shit so often. The only other conclusion I can come to is you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about or have such a narrow view that you simply cannot see anything beyond what you want to see or believe in. Either way have fun with it.

Oh gimme a break. This is the type of bullshit I deal with on a regular basis. I didnt change any goal posts. In fact, you're trying to explain it away. All I said, in a round about way, was that if you knew the DNC was PRIVATE, you wouldnt have made the 'dnc private corp lol wut' comment. But you did anyways and no wall of text will correct the fact you're wrong. You can convolute this shit with your own diatribe but it doesnt make you right.

That's all my post was about. And once again, I'm somehow wrong because you just say so.

Dec. 23, 2019, 12:17 p.m.
Posts: 11297
Joined: June 4, 2008

Posted by: syncro

Posted by: ReductiMat

Should we let the Chinese Government own our senior's homes?  But wait, what label do you ascribe yourself politically before you answer?

In what universe does that matter?

Every new person I meet I try my damnedest not to know how they lean and I just ask their opinions, otherwise a whole lot of fucking garbage gets in the way.

How is that different from any other large corporation as long as they follow the provincial guidelines? 

The label thing was in reference to having a political discussion, so people can easily figure out where they stand, what their values are, etc. 

Sure that works for some people.

I bet I could take that "test", answer three or four completely different ways and still come out "center".

A fat lot of good that tells anyone.

Dec. 23, 2019, 11:49 p.m.
Posts: 1923
Joined: May 23, 2006

Forum jump: