5 ms·

The presumption that there are always multiple perspectives and that they might be equally valid can be another bias. Especially in the news. Sometimes one part

The presumption that there are always multiple perspectives and that they might be equally valid can be another bias. Especially in the news. Sometimes one party is clearly right and the other is clearly wrong.

luckylion 6y ago
That's very rare though. Usually, the impression is achieved by intentionally leaving out facts to make the picture look more clear cut. Once you go into the details, in most cases, clarity goes away and everything gets fuzzy and grey. But nobody wants to read "it's complicated, here are some facts so you can figure out your thoughts on the matter", so we tend to cut away half and paint the rest in broad strokes to turn that into "This is reality, and here are the monsters who deny it".
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- BrianOnHN 6y ago
  I'd love to hear these "details" that paint conservative-trump supporters and their quack-anon conspiracies as anything other than monsters.
  - luckylion 6y ago
    Incentivizing people not to work leads to people not working.
    - BrianOnHN 6y ago
      That's a straw man argument based on your assumption of second or third-order consequences. Edit: No politician anywhere ever introduced a bill with the intentions of "Incentivizing people not to work." Even "shutting down the economy" has the intention of being able to get back to 100% sooner and thus maximizing total output/GDP/work over a period longer than the short-sighted days/weeks immediately ahead.
      - luckylion 6y ago
        The point is that pretending "conservatives just hate the poor" is the broad brush. The moral hazards of vast government social programs are the part that gets fuzzy and grey: it has great benefits in the moment, keeping people housed and fed. But it also has great disadvantages: making them lose their motivation and agency and making them permanently dependent on those programs. But if you zoom out and leave away the negatives: monsters!
        Falling3 6y ago
        Redlining, voter suppression, consistent attacks on important services (DMV, USPS, healthcare providers), drug testing for welfare recipients (despite the fact that these programs cost more than they save), anti-abortion crusades. There is a long list of evidence for conservative attacks on the poor in the US, which is in no way limited to programs like where the criticisms you mentioned apply - although I don't believe those criticisms are made in good faith to begin with anyway.
        luckylion 6y ago
        It appears that you're not interested in the point I was trying to make, but just want to fight with somebody about your political convictions. I'm not that somebody, I don't care about your domestic problems. I care about the behavior you're showing though, because that unfortunately isn't contained to the US. "The other side are all monsters" is common, that's why it's a problem. But you must get over "... but they really are monsters" to be able to see the problem, I'm afraid.
        Falling3 6y ago
        I responded to the point you tried to make; let's not pretend otherwise. I have a lot of problems with your analysis. Your original comment argued that conservative policies towards the poor are out of some concern for the future unintended consequences. I replied because we have mountains of evidence that is not the case. You then go on to straw man me with a false dichotomy that the Right's policies are either done out of some genuine altruism or that "they're monsters". We can acknowledge the reality of the situation without resorting to such ridiculous reductionism. And finally, I'm not looking for a fight about my political convictions. I'm correcting one more instance or a narrative that has plagued modern political discussions for decades. Both sides are not the same. And it's either ignorant or disingenuous to claim otherwise.
  - aeneasmackenzie 6y ago
    And I'd love to hear these details that paint the antihuman communists at the DNC as anything other than monsters.
kingkawn 6y ago
I said nothing of equal validity, that’s a straw man. I am saying that the Objective position is not real, and better to assess the subjectivity for its usefulness for a given problem.

luckylion 6y ago

That's very rare though. Usually, the impression is achieved by intentionally leaving out facts to make the picture look more clear cut. Once you go into the details, in most cases, clarity goes away and everything gets fuzzy and grey. But nobody wants to read "it's complicated, here are some facts so you can figure out your thoughts on the matter", so we tend to cut away half and paint the rest in broad strokes to turn that into "This is reality, and here are the monsters who deny it".

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
BrianOnHN 6y ago
I'd love to hear these "details" that paint conservative-trump supporters and their quack-anon conspiracies as anything other than monsters.
- luckylion 6y ago
  Incentivizing people not to work leads to people not working.
  - BrianOnHN 6y ago
    That's a straw man argument based on your assumption of second or third-order consequences. Edit: No politician anywhere ever introduced a bill with the intentions of "Incentivizing people not to work." Even "shutting down the economy" has the intention of being able to get back to 100% sooner and thus maximizing total output/GDP/work over a period longer than the short-sighted days/weeks immediately ahead.
    - luckylion 6y ago
      The point is that pretending "conservatives just hate the poor" is the broad brush. The moral hazards of vast government social programs are the part that gets fuzzy and grey: it has great benefits in the moment, keeping people housed and fed. But it also has great disadvantages: making them lose their motivation and agency and making them permanently dependent on those programs. But if you zoom out and leave away the negatives: monsters!
      - Falling3 6y ago
        Redlining, voter suppression, consistent attacks on important services (DMV, USPS, healthcare providers), drug testing for welfare recipients (despite the fact that these programs cost more than they save), anti-abortion crusades. There is a long list of evidence for conservative attacks on the poor in the US, which is in no way limited to programs like where the criticisms you mentioned apply - although I don't believe those criticisms are made in good faith to begin with anyway.
        luckylion 6y ago
        It appears that you're not interested in the point I was trying to make, but just want to fight with somebody about your political convictions. I'm not that somebody, I don't care about your domestic problems. I care about the behavior you're showing though, because that unfortunately isn't contained to the US. "The other side are all monsters" is common, that's why it's a problem. But you must get over "... but they really are monsters" to be able to see the problem, I'm afraid.
        Falling3 6y ago
        I responded to the point you tried to make; let's not pretend otherwise. I have a lot of problems with your analysis. Your original comment argued that conservative policies towards the poor are out of some concern for the future unintended consequences. I replied because we have mountains of evidence that is not the case. You then go on to straw man me with a false dichotomy that the Right's policies are either done out of some genuine altruism or that "they're monsters". We can acknowledge the reality of the situation without resorting to such ridiculous reductionism. And finally, I'm not looking for a fight about my political convictions. I'm correcting one more instance or a narrative that has plagued modern political discussions for decades. Both sides are not the same. And it's either ignorant or disingenuous to claim otherwise.
- aeneasmackenzie 6y ago
  And I'd love to hear these details that paint the antihuman communists at the DNC as anything other than monsters.

kingkawn 6y ago

I said nothing of equal validity, that’s a straw man. I am saying that the Objective position is not real, and better to assess the subjectivity for its usefulness for a given problem.