> The notion that the loudest and most populist voices that make ridiculous arguments and appeal to sentimentality - have anything to do with the 'truth' or any

> The notion that the loudest and most populist voices that make ridiculous arguments and appeal to sentimentality - have anything to do with the 'truth' or anything positive ... is an obvious strawman. > Next time you visit your 'Corrupt High Priest Doctor' who represents the institution of Medicine, who recommends a therapy, why don't you ignore him and make your own concoction, at home, using the 'alt method' you discovered on some podcast? Again an obvious strawman. Your doctor vs "some podcast". According to a survey done in april 2022, 5.2% of U.S. primary care doctors weren't vaxxed against covid[1]. If you had such a doctor, would you override his judgement based on stuff you've read on the internet? I would. > Ideas and memes can define reality, and those who have the power to define reality will possibly abuse it which is why it's not in anyone's interest to have insane people influence how we think. Woah, sounds dangerous. Should anyone have the power to "define reality"? At least we can trust that those who have to power to stop others from "defining reality" will not abuse it. [1]: https://theconversation.com/the-1-in-10-u-s-doctors-with-reservations-about-vaccines-could-be-undermining-the-fight-against-covid-19-179929 https://theconversation.com/the-1-in-10-u-s-doctors-with-res...