3 ms·

> Let me remind you again that you need to address my arguments to refute it. It's getting hilarious at this point. It's like you think you had a valid argumen

by hnfong 3y ago

> Let me remind you again that you need to address my arguments to refute it. It's getting hilarious at this point. It's like you think you had a valid argument and expected others to engage with you on your level. You had empty assertions. GP explained why Singapore is not a "police state". Now you admit Singapore might not be a "police state" effectively agreeing with them, then finally follow up with substantial arguments, and accuse the GP of not engaging with them. I'm not sure whether you're aware, your "arguments" are like so tired that I might have seen them hundreds of times. Why even bother to engage with an evangelist who's not interested in constructive discussion but rather in some toxic "refutation" of one's arguments?

lgvln 3y ago
If you believe I do not have an argument, feel free to refute my references and construct a coherent argument backed up by credible references (YouTube or thekopi.co are not). Here is a selection: [0] https://www.cambridge.org/us/universitypress/subjects/politics-international-relations/south-east-asian-government-politics-and-policy/singapore-identity-brand-power https://www.cambridge.org/us/universitypress/subjects/politi... [1] https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/authoritarian-rule-of-law/E7911140302F6029C738AD13A5D58D0F https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/authoritarian-rule-of-l... [2] https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691211411/spin-dictators https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691211411/sp... [3] https://www.ethosbooks.com.sg/products/air-conditioned-nation-revisited https://www.ethosbooks.com.sg/products/air-conditioned-natio...
- gmerc 3y ago
  None of these seem relevant to the question of why you feel the need to jump onto a thread about the colors found in Singapore with colonial mansplaining about authoritarianism.. backed up by writings from Cambridge, cherry on top by a writer specialized in Colonial Law. Since all you do is basically spew links while ignoring any of the attempts to have a conversation, we thank you for your service of acting as a poster child for colonial mansplaining we shall be using in an upcoming article on the topic.
- hnfong 3y ago
  If I wanted to refute a bunch of random scholar's books and papers I'd be in academia already. The fact that you think a reference ending in cambridge.org and princeton.edu is "credible" quite laughable. They're literally a government's propaganda reserve. It's like claiming studies funded by narcotics companies are credible for informing you about the benefits of smoking to your health. (Hate to "mansplain" for you but the main source of funding for universities are governments.)
  - mdp2021 3y ago
    > the main source of funding for universities are governments Further off-topic, but extremely important: was a way ever found to avoid that pitfall, of intellectual production being bound by financial contributions? Freelance intellectuals living on other means (e.g. book sales) may be only somehow less constrained. Aware of the issue of biased sources, you will have faced the problem: do you also have keys to get to unbiased sources?
  - lgvln 3y ago
    This conversation perfectly illustrates the sort of bad reasoning common among anti-vaxx, conspiracy theorists etc. They have little understanding of what constitutes good, credible evidence - Cambridge and Princeton publications are "literally a government's propaganda reserve" while the sources used are "YouTube and blogs such as the kopi.co". Along with this erroneous standard is poor reasoning - "I read a blog post by thekopi.co on standards of the Singapore police so Singapore is not a police state"; "universities are funded by government hence universities are biased". When they are faced with overwhelming evidence against their views, instead of changing their views, they refuse to accept the evidence and resort to ad hominem arguments plus abusive language. If all else fails, they move the conversation to something else (shifting the goal posts) - "this post is not about politics, we shouldn't be talking about politics". It is impossible to convince someone with reason if the person is simply unreasonable - erroneous standards, bad reasoning, fallacious arguments - but it has been illuminating on how such minds "work". Carry on hnfong and gmerc, I'd love to add more to the above.
    - hnfong 3y ago

by hnfong 3y ago

lgvln 3y ago

If you believe I do not have an argument, feel free to refute my references and construct a coherent argument backed up by credible references (YouTube or thekopi.co are not). Here is a selection: [0] https://www.cambridge.org/us/universitypress/subjects/politics-international-relations/south-east-asian-government-politics-and-policy/singapore-identity-brand-power https://www.cambridge.org/us/universitypress/subjects/politi... [1] https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/authoritarian-rule-of-law/E7911140302F6029C738AD13A5D58D0F https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/authoritarian-rule-of-l... [2] https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691211411/spin-dictators https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691211411/sp... [3] https://www.ethosbooks.com.sg/products/air-conditioned-nation-revisited https://www.ethosbooks.com.sg/products/air-conditioned-natio...

gmerc 3y ago
None of these seem relevant to the question of why you feel the need to jump onto a thread about the colors found in Singapore with colonial mansplaining about authoritarianism.. backed up by writings from Cambridge, cherry on top by a writer specialized in Colonial Law. Since all you do is basically spew links while ignoring any of the attempts to have a conversation, we thank you for your service of acting as a poster child for colonial mansplaining we shall be using in an upcoming article on the topic.
hnfong 3y ago
If I wanted to refute a bunch of random scholar's books and papers I'd be in academia already. The fact that you think a reference ending in cambridge.org and princeton.edu is "credible" quite laughable. They're literally a government's propaganda reserve. It's like claiming studies funded by narcotics companies are credible for informing you about the benefits of smoking to your health. (Hate to "mansplain" for you but the main source of funding for universities are governments.)
- mdp2021 3y ago
  > the main source of funding for universities are governments Further off-topic, but extremely important: was a way ever found to avoid that pitfall, of intellectual production being bound by financial contributions? Freelance intellectuals living on other means (e.g. book sales) may be only somehow less constrained. Aware of the issue of biased sources, you will have faced the problem: do you also have keys to get to unbiased sources?
- lgvln 3y ago
  This conversation perfectly illustrates the sort of bad reasoning common among anti-vaxx, conspiracy theorists etc. They have little understanding of what constitutes good, credible evidence - Cambridge and Princeton publications are "literally a government's propaganda reserve" while the sources used are "YouTube and blogs such as the kopi.co". Along with this erroneous standard is poor reasoning - "I read a blog post by thekopi.co on standards of the Singapore police so Singapore is not a police state"; "universities are funded by government hence universities are biased". When they are faced with overwhelming evidence against their views, instead of changing their views, they refuse to accept the evidence and resort to ad hominem arguments plus abusive language. If all else fails, they move the conversation to something else (shifting the goal posts) - "this post is not about politics, we shouldn't be talking about politics". It is impossible to convince someone with reason if the person is simply unreasonable - erroneous standards, bad reasoning, fallacious arguments - but it has been illuminating on how such minds "work". Carry on hnfong and gmerc, I'd love to add more to the above.
  - hnfong 3y ago