5 ms·

> an emotionally and politically charged topic that can be hard to discuss with any clarity. Not to mention the probable billions of dollars spent in an effort

> an emotionally and politically charged topic that can be hard to discuss with any clarity. Not to mention the probable billions of dollars spent in an effort to increase public ignorance[1] around the issue. (See [2], for example.) 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnotology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnotology 2: https://www.desmog.com/2014/10/31/oil-and-gas-industry-s-endless-war-fracking-critics-revealed-rick-berman/ https://www.desmog.com/2014/10/31/oil-and-gas-industry-s-end...

nerdponx 3y ago
As if people don't have the right to get a little emotional when this is what they're up against. Is there a name for this "appeal to-non emotion" line of non-reasoning? Maybe the "Vulcan Fallacy"?
- Karunamon 3y ago
  Emotions are not reasoning, pure and simple. When what you want is to get to the truth, especially in the context of reading words on the screen, getting emotional is purely an impediment to the goal.
  - nerdponx 3y ago
    The truth is useful, but how often is it really the goal? What happens if it's unknowable, or if there simply isn't a single factual truth?
  - godelski 3y ago
    You can't have thoughts without emotions. There is such a thing as being too emotional and letting the emotions take control and prevent you from using proper reasoning, but this isn't the absence of emotions. Emotions are highly useful, but like anything it is more about balance. Don't try to be a Vulcan Mr Spock, you're human too.
    - Karunamon 3y ago
      Sure you can. What emotion do you feel when evaluating the correctness of the statement 2+2 = 4? More importantly, if you can even name one, what impact does it have on the outcome? Again, the claim was that emotions are an impediment to truth-seeking. They are not reasoning. They are useful for interpersonal relationships, but absolutely worthless when determining whether something is true or false. If we are going to play at tired pop-culture references, here is another: facts don't care about your feelings
      - godelski 3y ago
        Generally bordem? Sometimes if I'm doing a lot of these types of work I get sloppy and can transpose numbers or make small errors. For example, my comment obviously made you feel upset. There is no reason to believe I have not understood the claim correctly. I just disagreed with it. Which should be okay. Not everyone has to agree with you, right? That would be egotistical. But let's look at a clear example that is much harder to dispute in how emotions play a role. You know that _joy_ and _excitement_ you get when you solve a really tough problem? How you overcame all that _frustration_ and _disappointment_? That dopamine hit that makes you feel on top of the world? That also is part of what drives you to keep pursuing these things. That makes you _stubborn_ and _focused_ because you have _pride_ and you're _curiosity_ _driven_. Without emotions you wouldn't be doing this in the first place. The thing is that your biological machine was designed with emotions into the operating system. It is part of the language itself. But we are probably instead thinking of the definition of emotions differently. Just because you don't notice your feelings doesn't mean they aren't there. Indifference, seriousness, sincerity, ennui, indigence, self-confidence, reluctance, calmness, annoyance, insightfulness, and perseverance are all emotions, some of which you are exhibiting right now as you read this. What I propose instead is that recognizing this you can in turn control your emotions rather than let them be in control of you, which I think you'd fully agree upon. Emotions don't have to be extreme but nor do they need to be depressed (diction chosen with intent). They don't have to cleanly fit in a bin. Instead, emotions to us are like water to a fish. Rather than ridding yourself of emotions, you harness them. I'd suggest that it is a far better way to reach your goals as your working with the wetware you've been given instead of working against it. You don't need to install a new operating system but just learn to exploit the one you have. That's why I say that you are human too Mr Spock.
revelio 3y ago
Last time someone made this claim about "probable billions of dollars" here, I asked for examples and the best anyone could show was a $10k donation to a tiny charity run by one guy that campaigned against offshore wind farms, with a stated justification that there were better ways to help the environment. Can anyone show an accounting of these billions? Because you can't spend that kind of money without leaving a lot of paper trails.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- ZeroGravitas 3y ago
  From the desmog link in the comment you replied to: > “Fear and anger have to be a part of this campaign,” Berman said. “We’re not going to get people to like the oil and gas industry over the next few months.” > Berman also advised that executives continue to spend big. “I think $2 to $3 million would be a game changer,” he said. “We’ve had six-figure contributions to date from a few companies in this room to help us get to where we are.” > But always cover your tracks, he suggested, adding that no is better equipped at doing so than his firm. “We run all this stuff through nonprofit organizations that are insulated from having to disclose donors. There is total anonymity,” he said. “People don’t know who supports us. We’ve been doing this for 20-something years in this regard.” > Berman, whose tobacco ties were profiled yesterday by DeSmog contributor John Mashey, is the founder and chief executive of the Washington-based Berman & Company consulting firm. He attended the conference in Colorado, hat in hand, looking to raise money from energy companies for an advertising and public relations campaign he started called Big Green Radicals.
  - revelio 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - ZeroGravitas 3y ago
      If that one firm takes in 10 million a year for 20 years that's .2 Billion going to one firm. https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=e01 https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=e01 https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?Ind=E04 https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?Ind=E04 You easily get to billions, even if you just look at one sector, or one country, or one target. Their PR budgets are about a Billion a year.

nerdponx 3y ago

As if people don't have the right to get a little emotional when this is what they're up against. Is there a name for this "appeal to-non emotion" line of non-reasoning? Maybe the "Vulcan Fallacy"?

Karunamon 3y ago
Emotions are not reasoning, pure and simple. When what you want is to get to the truth, especially in the context of reading words on the screen, getting emotional is purely an impediment to the goal.
- nerdponx 3y ago
  The truth is useful, but how often is it really the goal? What happens if it's unknowable, or if there simply isn't a single factual truth?
- godelski 3y ago
  You can't have thoughts without emotions. There is such a thing as being too emotional and letting the emotions take control and prevent you from using proper reasoning, but this isn't the absence of emotions. Emotions are highly useful, but like anything it is more about balance. Don't try to be a Vulcan Mr Spock, you're human too.
  - Karunamon 3y ago
    Sure you can. What emotion do you feel when evaluating the correctness of the statement 2+2 = 4? More importantly, if you can even name one, what impact does it have on the outcome? Again, the claim was that emotions are an impediment to truth-seeking. They are not reasoning. They are useful for interpersonal relationships, but absolutely worthless when determining whether something is true or false. If we are going to play at tired pop-culture references, here is another: facts don't care about your feelings
    - godelski 3y ago
      Generally bordem? Sometimes if I'm doing a lot of these types of work I get sloppy and can transpose numbers or make small errors. For example, my comment obviously made you feel upset. There is no reason to believe I have not understood the claim correctly. I just disagreed with it. Which should be okay. Not everyone has to agree with you, right? That would be egotistical. But let's look at a clear example that is much harder to dispute in how emotions play a role. You know that _joy_ and _excitement_ you get when you solve a really tough problem? How you overcame all that _frustration_ and _disappointment_? That dopamine hit that makes you feel on top of the world? That also is part of what drives you to keep pursuing these things. That makes you _stubborn_ and _focused_ because you have _pride_ and you're _curiosity_ _driven_. Without emotions you wouldn't be doing this in the first place. The thing is that your biological machine was designed with emotions into the operating system. It is part of the language itself. But we are probably instead thinking of the definition of emotions differently. Just because you don't notice your feelings doesn't mean they aren't there. Indifference, seriousness, sincerity, ennui, indigence, self-confidence, reluctance, calmness, annoyance, insightfulness, and perseverance are all emotions, some of which you are exhibiting right now as you read this. What I propose instead is that recognizing this you can in turn control your emotions rather than let them be in control of you, which I think you'd fully agree upon. Emotions don't have to be extreme but nor do they need to be depressed (diction chosen with intent). They don't have to cleanly fit in a bin. Instead, emotions to us are like water to a fish. Rather than ridding yourself of emotions, you harness them. I'd suggest that it is a far better way to reach your goals as your working with the wetware you've been given instead of working against it. You don't need to install a new operating system but just learn to exploit the one you have. That's why I say that you are human too Mr Spock.

revelio 3y ago

Last time someone made this claim about "probable billions of dollars" here, I asked for examples and the best anyone could show was a $10k donation to a tiny charity run by one guy that campaigned against offshore wind farms, with a stated justification that there were better ways to help the environment. Can anyone show an accounting of these billions? Because you can't spend that kind of money without leaving a lot of paper trails.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
ZeroGravitas 3y ago
From the desmog link in the comment you replied to: > “Fear and anger have to be a part of this campaign,” Berman said. “We’re not going to get people to like the oil and gas industry over the next few months.” > Berman also advised that executives continue to spend big. “I think $2 to $3 million would be a game changer,” he said. “We’ve had six-figure contributions to date from a few companies in this room to help us get to where we are.” > But always cover your tracks, he suggested, adding that no is better equipped at doing so than his firm. “We run all this stuff through nonprofit organizations that are insulated from having to disclose donors. There is total anonymity,” he said. “People don’t know who supports us. We’ve been doing this for 20-something years in this regard.” > Berman, whose tobacco ties were profiled yesterday by DeSmog contributor John Mashey, is the founder and chief executive of the Washington-based Berman & Company consulting firm. He attended the conference in Colorado, hat in hand, looking to raise money from energy companies for an advertising and public relations campaign he started called Big Green Radicals.
- revelio 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - ZeroGravitas 3y ago
    If that one firm takes in 10 million a year for 20 years that's .2 Billion going to one firm. https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=e01 https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=e01 https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?Ind=E04 https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?Ind=E04 You easily get to billions, even if you just look at one sector, or one country, or one target. Their PR budgets are about a Billion a year.