3 ms·

> I care that the people they've voted in and appointed to the supreme court are all of those things... Do you care whether this belief (which may have the app

> I care that the people they've voted in and appointed to the supreme court are all of those things... Do you care whether this belief (which may have the appearance of knowledge) is objectively and flawlessly true?

watwut 5y ago
The abortion banning part is provably true at this point. And it is very fair to guess it was plan from the start, despite pretention not. Despite calling those who guesses it 100% correctly exaggerating and hysterical.
- mistermann 5y ago
  The claim was: >> I don't care whether voters in some red state are queer-bashing, abortion-banning putin apologists that want to strip mine for coal. (Want them for neighbors, or not? Move!) >> I care that the people they've voted in and appointed to the supreme court are all of those things > The abortion banning part is provably true at this point. a) Not comprehensively for all people, as was claimed. b) It is supreme court justices that would be banning it, not elected representatives. c) How might one prove it for any given elected representative, short of an explicit confession? d) Abortion banning wasn't the only claim. > And it is very fair to guess it was plan from the start, despite pretention not. "Fair to say" and "correct/true" are very different things. > Despite calling those who guesses it 100% correctly exaggerating and hysterical. Where "100% correctly" refers to perception of reality, but is typically perceived as reality itself. Human beings are silly, I would say without exception - News at 11.
  - watwut 5y ago
    > Human beings are silly, I would say without exception - News at 11. I dont think they are silly. I think that they prefer to good relationship with that political branch over telling truth. They think it makes them sound like smart and rational and dont mind throwing others under the bus in the process. E.g., they have priorities. > "Fair to say" and "correct/true" are very different things. Ok, I will say out loud, it is correct thing to say. > It is supreme court justices that would be banning it, not elected representatives. Supreme court did not came out of skies. They were put in place by politicians who picked people guaranteed to make political decisions. > Abortion banning wasn't the only claim. No. But it was part I 100% agree with.
    - mistermann 5y ago
      > Ok, I will say out loud, it is correct thing to say. It may be a "correct thing to say" (aka: popular), but this is distinctly different from correct from en epistemology perspective. > But it was part I 100% agree with. You are welcome to agree, but I am discussing what is true (and indirectly, the nature of human consciousness, which renders the customized/unique "reality" that each person on this forum experiences, and tends to mistake for reality itself).

watwut 5y ago

The abortion banning part is provably true at this point. And it is very fair to guess it was plan from the start, despite pretention not. Despite calling those who guesses it 100% correctly exaggerating and hysterical.

mistermann 5y ago
The claim was: >> I don't care whether voters in some red state are queer-bashing, abortion-banning putin apologists that want to strip mine for coal. (Want them for neighbors, or not? Move!) >> I care that the people they've voted in and appointed to the supreme court are all of those things > The abortion banning part is provably true at this point. a) Not comprehensively for all people, as was claimed. b) It is supreme court justices that would be banning it, not elected representatives. c) How might one prove it for any given elected representative, short of an explicit confession? d) Abortion banning wasn't the only claim. > And it is very fair to guess it was plan from the start, despite pretention not. "Fair to say" and "correct/true" are very different things. > Despite calling those who guesses it 100% correctly exaggerating and hysterical. Where "100% correctly" refers to perception of reality, but is typically perceived as reality itself. Human beings are silly, I would say without exception - News at 11.
- watwut 5y ago
  > Human beings are silly, I would say without exception - News at 11. I dont think they are silly. I think that they prefer to good relationship with that political branch over telling truth. They think it makes them sound like smart and rational and dont mind throwing others under the bus in the process. E.g., they have priorities. > "Fair to say" and "correct/true" are very different things. Ok, I will say out loud, it is correct thing to say. > It is supreme court justices that would be banning it, not elected representatives. Supreme court did not came out of skies. They were put in place by politicians who picked people guaranteed to make political decisions. > Abortion banning wasn't the only claim. No. But it was part I 100% agree with.
  - mistermann 5y ago
    > Ok, I will say out loud, it is correct thing to say. It may be a "correct thing to say" (aka: popular), but this is distinctly different from correct from en epistemology perspective. > But it was part I 100% agree with. You are welcome to agree, but I am discussing what is true (and indirectly, the nature of human consciousness, which renders the customized/unique "reality" that each person on this forum experiences, and tends to mistake for reality itself).