5 ms·

The other day I was arguing with anti-vaxer people I know on FB.. Upon checking their FB profiles (as I like to do to try to understand these people better) I s

The other day I was arguing with anti-vaxer people I know on FB.. Upon checking their FB profiles (as I like to do to try to understand these people better) I saw they were also denying that there is actually a heat wave in Europe and it's actually all a big scam to keep us all scared, apparently it's the next thing for the media after they have used up Covid for this role.. This institutional disdain is all engulfing by this point, and unfortunately being used more and more by politicians and any party that is morally bankrupts enough and finds a way to exploit this. Is there anything we (as in people who believe in science and still have some institutional belief) should be doing to help science/media/institutions get their shit together?

swayvil 4y ago
- beepbooptheory 4y ago
  As different, presumably, to the gp, I commend you for being level headed and compassionate, even with people you disagree with, and especially around such big topics. That kind of universal kindness and empathy doesn't grow on trees, and takes sometimes hard work; I can tell by your tone you are like that and it gives me hope for our future. Thanks, truly. Im not sure what 'chortle' is?
  - swayvil 4y ago
    It's like guffaw except with extra phlegm.
- leroman 4y ago
  It's unfortunate you see it this way.. Actually, I recommend you do the same. This has helped me to- - find them more humain when I see these people in family gatherings and other life events - find that we have some other ideological intersection (vegan, promoting donation to help animals etc..) It's very easy to de-humanize someone on the internet, this has helped me to understand these are real people, and not "bots" who are paid to say things I find hard to believe anyone could believe in..
- roflyear 4y ago
  Mental illness is everywhere.
  - MonkeyMalarky 4y ago
    Therapy doesn't scale and the drugs just turn people into zombies. The only solution is to prevent it in the first place. Too bad all it takes is one traumatic event to push so many people over the edge into world of nonsense.
narrator 4y ago
The new method of arguing is not to actually look at the person's argument but to instead investigate their background to find some other belief they have. Once you find a cancellable belief, you can use that to cancel them and then you can safely ignore their argument. If anyone asks you about their argument, you can just point to the other thing they believe without actually addressing their argument. The reason for this new method of arguing is that arguing without fallacies is hard, and the other person may have a good argument, but then if you follow logic and don't use fallacies and somehow believe that argument everyone will cancel you and completely ignore everything you have to say because when they investigate your background they will find that you believe an argument that makes you cancellable. This is just repackaged Lysenkoism where you stop questioning someone's theory because the whole rest of your life will get cancelled if you do. "More than 3,000 mainstream biologists were dismissed or imprisoned, and numerous scientists were executed in the Soviet campaign to suppress scientific opponents. "[1] Then later on, Stalin, in "Marxism and the Problem of Linguistics" decided that he had made a mistake politicizing basic science and denounced people who attached ideological labels to science and language. That's because Beria was having trouble getting the nuclear bomb project finished because ideologues inside the party were trying to cancel scientists who believed in relativity. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysenkoism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysenkoism
csours 4y ago
People don't maintain different sections of their brains for "beliefs arrived at by dispassionate and factual study" and "beliefs that help me get through the day and give me power over my situation" and "weirdo beliefs that I got from the sewer of the internet". All of the conspiracy theory people feel a loss of control over their lives or disconnection with society. They feel like traditional media is trying to invalidate their personal experiences. Lots of people are willing and ready to exploit that feeling by wedging in a conspiracy theory. Then these exploiters will either sell them something, or try to get them to vote for a candidate, or something. There are also some genuine crazy people, but don't assume that as the default. So what can you do? I think you can only make a difference in a 1 on 1 conversation. You can't directly repudiate their weirdo beliefs. You have to acknowledge what they believe. You have to accept at the start of the conversation that you may not turn them around. If you really want to make a difference, have a tiny goal for each conversation - just connect with them. Let them feel like people from the mainstream world care about them. Look up "High Demand Groups" (aka Cults). The resources for them also apply to people who believe in conspiracy theories.
yreg 4y ago
I used to be optimistic that in the end the humanity would pull through and manage to keep global warming under +2°C. After covid I've lost a lot of that hope. We've seen the masses unwilling to undergo the incredibly minor inconvenience of wearing a mask and getting a jab to prevent deaths of their neighbours. How can we hope to together give up our comfort to the extent it will be needed to face the challenges that lay ahead?
splittingTimes 4y ago
My take on this is that those people lack fundamental understanding of science and how it works [1]. Their math is of the level of a sixth grader. If you do not understand something, it is easier to mistrust it and they are easier manipulated. > Is there anything we (as in people who believe in science and still have some institutional belief) should be doing to help science/media/institutions get their shit together? Help in Education. There are levels to this. Start with your children. Encourage and foster their curiosity. Help them to become critical thinkers. Be involved in their educational institutions. Asks if the kids could have a field trip to the local museum of science / natural history or the planetarium or astronomy observatory. Offer yourself to be a reading/literacy mentor and pick interesting books. If you really got a nack for it, get involved in the institutions themselves: Become a science educator, be it a school teacher, in a community college, or elsewhere. This is the long game. Will take at least 18 years. Change politics. Again there are levels. Become interested at first. Then become more involved. Bring your expertise to the table. Etc. It is a very very difficult path where we will often fail to succeed, but I think we should try. In politics we would have access to the biggest levers to enact changes. A big problem is that science becomes politicized and corrupted to serve a certain agenda, see COVID response [2]. Or how big corporations can sponsor fake science (tabacco, oil, sugar industry) and use it to deter political decision. === [1] on a very basic level, like looking for patterns in empiric observations, of formulating a falsifiable theory, test it with experiments. That level. [2] in the beginning the response was science based, but then an agenda kicked in and the measurements did not change when the science/dynamics of the pandemic changed. (Vaccines do prevent hospitalization, but not infection. They do not lead to herd immunity. They became ever less effective with newer variants. The variants became less lethal. Still the government was hell bent on vaccine mandates, when it was clear that it would really just only protect you and not others. There was never a study on the effect on long COVID. Children's response is overwhelmingly mild, ect.
dqpb 4y ago
Covid deniers prayer: - Covid isn’t real - and if it is real, it’s not that bad - and if it is that bad, it’s not as bad as the vaccine - and if it is worse than the vaccine, it’s fine because I already had it in 2019 source: Real conversations I had with a family member.

swayvil 4y ago

beepbooptheory 4y ago
As different, presumably, to the gp, I commend you for being level headed and compassionate, even with people you disagree with, and especially around such big topics. That kind of universal kindness and empathy doesn't grow on trees, and takes sometimes hard work; I can tell by your tone you are like that and it gives me hope for our future. Thanks, truly. Im not sure what 'chortle' is?
- swayvil 4y ago
  It's like guffaw except with extra phlegm.
leroman 4y ago
It's unfortunate you see it this way.. Actually, I recommend you do the same. This has helped me to- - find them more humain when I see these people in family gatherings and other life events - find that we have some other ideological intersection (vegan, promoting donation to help animals etc..) It's very easy to de-humanize someone on the internet, this has helped me to understand these are real people, and not "bots" who are paid to say things I find hard to believe anyone could believe in..
roflyear 4y ago
Mental illness is everywhere.
- MonkeyMalarky 4y ago
  Therapy doesn't scale and the drugs just turn people into zombies. The only solution is to prevent it in the first place. Too bad all it takes is one traumatic event to push so many people over the edge into world of nonsense.

narrator 4y ago

The new method of arguing is not to actually look at the person's argument but to instead investigate their background to find some other belief they have. Once you find a cancellable belief, you can use that to cancel them and then you can safely ignore their argument. If anyone asks you about their argument, you can just point to the other thing they believe without actually addressing their argument. The reason for this new method of arguing is that arguing without fallacies is hard, and the other person may have a good argument, but then if you follow logic and don't use fallacies and somehow believe that argument everyone will cancel you and completely ignore everything you have to say because when they investigate your background they will find that you believe an argument that makes you cancellable. This is just repackaged Lysenkoism where you stop questioning someone's theory because the whole rest of your life will get cancelled if you do. "More than 3,000 mainstream biologists were dismissed or imprisoned, and numerous scientists were executed in the Soviet campaign to suppress scientific opponents. "[1] Then later on, Stalin, in "Marxism and the Problem of Linguistics" decided that he had made a mistake politicizing basic science and denounced people who attached ideological labels to science and language. That's because Beria was having trouble getting the nuclear bomb project finished because ideologues inside the party were trying to cancel scientists who believed in relativity. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysenkoism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lysenkoism

csours 4y ago

People don't maintain different sections of their brains for "beliefs arrived at by dispassionate and factual study" and "beliefs that help me get through the day and give me power over my situation" and "weirdo beliefs that I got from the sewer of the internet". All of the conspiracy theory people feel a loss of control over their lives or disconnection with society. They feel like traditional media is trying to invalidate their personal experiences. Lots of people are willing and ready to exploit that feeling by wedging in a conspiracy theory. Then these exploiters will either sell them something, or try to get them to vote for a candidate, or something. There are also some genuine crazy people, but don't assume that as the default. So what can you do? I think you can only make a difference in a 1 on 1 conversation. You can't directly repudiate their weirdo beliefs. You have to acknowledge what they believe. You have to accept at the start of the conversation that you may not turn them around. If you really want to make a difference, have a tiny goal for each conversation - just connect with them. Let them feel like people from the mainstream world care about them. Look up "High Demand Groups" (aka Cults). The resources for them also apply to people who believe in conspiracy theories.

yreg 4y ago

I used to be optimistic that in the end the humanity would pull through and manage to keep global warming under +2°C. After covid I've lost a lot of that hope. We've seen the masses unwilling to undergo the incredibly minor inconvenience of wearing a mask and getting a jab to prevent deaths of their neighbours. How can we hope to together give up our comfort to the extent it will be needed to face the challenges that lay ahead?

splittingTimes 4y ago

My take on this is that those people lack fundamental understanding of science and how it works [1]. Their math is of the level of a sixth grader. If you do not understand something, it is easier to mistrust it and they are easier manipulated. > Is there anything we (as in people who believe in science and still have some institutional belief) should be doing to help science/media/institutions get their shit together? Help in Education. There are levels to this. Start with your children. Encourage and foster their curiosity. Help them to become critical thinkers. Be involved in their educational institutions. Asks if the kids could have a field trip to the local museum of science / natural history or the planetarium or astronomy observatory. Offer yourself to be a reading/literacy mentor and pick interesting books. If you really got a nack for it, get involved in the institutions themselves: Become a science educator, be it a school teacher, in a community college, or elsewhere. This is the long game. Will take at least 18 years. Change politics. Again there are levels. Become interested at first. Then become more involved. Bring your expertise to the table. Etc. It is a very very difficult path where we will often fail to succeed, but I think we should try. In politics we would have access to the biggest levers to enact changes. A big problem is that science becomes politicized and corrupted to serve a certain agenda, see COVID response [2]. Or how big corporations can sponsor fake science (tabacco, oil, sugar industry) and use it to deter political decision. === [1] on a very basic level, like looking for patterns in empiric observations, of formulating a falsifiable theory, test it with experiments. That level. [2] in the beginning the response was science based, but then an agenda kicked in and the measurements did not change when the science/dynamics of the pandemic changed. (Vaccines do prevent hospitalization, but not infection. They do not lead to herd immunity. They became ever less effective with newer variants. The variants became less lethal. Still the government was hell bent on vaccine mandates, when it was clear that it would really just only protect you and not others. There was never a study on the effect on long COVID. Children's response is overwhelmingly mild, ect.

dqpb 4y ago

Covid deniers prayer: - Covid isn’t real - and if it is real, it’s not that bad - and if it is that bad, it’s not as bad as the vaccine - and if it is worse than the vaccine, it’s fine because I already had it in 2019 source: Real conversations I had with a family member.