3 ms·

People should not have strong opinions on things they know nothing about. Extra scrutiny on people who insist they know a lot, and everyone else knows little.

People should not have strong opinions on things they know nothing about. Extra scrutiny on people who insist they know a lot, and everyone else knows little. I’m sure you’re the exception here

mjburgess 3y ago
I'm no exception. The only thing i've claimed knowledge of is that knowing the benefits or harms of the state, market, etc. is circumstantial, empirical and requires a lot of study. Insofar as it sounds arrogant its because it's a knowledge claim against the ideologue who regards their own ideology as prima facie obvious, knowledge-conferring, and reliving them of any duties to serious study. In other-words my arrogance, such as it is, is skin deep and explicitly stated. But its in reply to the deep-seated lack of humility and profound ideological arrogance of those who think you can use soundbites to describe perhaps the most complex object anywhere in the universe (ie., a modern political economy). Maybe it should sometimes be said that when a person is replacing thinking with soundbites, that they arent thinking at all. Maybe this is a less-bad form of arrogance than the alternative.
- soco 3y ago
  If we're at presenting our backgrounds, I cannot speak for what goes in the US under the name of "capitalism" but being raised behind the iron curtain I had to study marxism in school. Also as European I think I can pretty well see what labels itself as left or far left (because we do have all of that). So please understand my smirk when I see those labels used by people with only ideological motivation but little to none demonstrated knowledge about the meanings. Smirk, because in this age of ChatGPT when the knowledge is even more right there under our noses, some still prefer to align instead of learn.
  - mjburgess 3y ago
    The words mean all what they ought
    - partitioned 3y ago
      You might want to look into 'deep-seated lack of humility'
      - mjburgess 3y ago
        I just find it an amusing way to talk, circumstantially. Since it places a sort of ironic lack of humility against the supposed humility and good-faith of another, and there's an interesting dynamic there. I have an extremely dry sense of humor that does get me intro trouble. Here I was speaking very literally, and yet by using phrases like 'far left' taken to be signalling something non-literal. In doing this I was splitting the audience into those looking for dogwhistles and those reading what i've said. If someone replied having read what i'd said, i'd take quite a different tone. That someone reacted superficially, to supposed implications that didn't exist -- well, that doesnt great any obligation on me to be anything other than ironic.
      - soco 3y ago
        Looks also like a Dunning Kruger effect. Luckily it's only a HN storm in a teacup.

People should not have strong opinions on things they know nothing about. Extra scrutiny on people who insist they know a lot, and everyone else knows little. I’m sure you’re the exception here

mjburgess 3y ago

I'm no exception. The only thing i've claimed knowledge of is that knowing the benefits or harms of the state, market, etc. is circumstantial, empirical and requires a lot of study. Insofar as it sounds arrogant its because it's a knowledge claim against the ideologue who regards their own ideology as prima facie obvious, knowledge-conferring, and reliving them of any duties to serious study. In other-words my arrogance, such as it is, is skin deep and explicitly stated. But its in reply to the deep-seated lack of humility and profound ideological arrogance of those who think you can use soundbites to describe perhaps the most complex object anywhere in the universe (ie., a modern political economy). Maybe it should sometimes be said that when a person is replacing thinking with soundbites, that they arent thinking at all. Maybe this is a less-bad form of arrogance than the alternative.

soco 3y ago
If we're at presenting our backgrounds, I cannot speak for what goes in the US under the name of "capitalism" but being raised behind the iron curtain I had to study marxism in school. Also as European I think I can pretty well see what labels itself as left or far left (because we do have all of that). So please understand my smirk when I see those labels used by people with only ideological motivation but little to none demonstrated knowledge about the meanings. Smirk, because in this age of ChatGPT when the knowledge is even more right there under our noses, some still prefer to align instead of learn.
- mjburgess 3y ago
  The words mean all what they ought
  - partitioned 3y ago
    You might want to look into 'deep-seated lack of humility'
    - mjburgess 3y ago
      I just find it an amusing way to talk, circumstantially. Since it places a sort of ironic lack of humility against the supposed humility and good-faith of another, and there's an interesting dynamic there. I have an extremely dry sense of humor that does get me intro trouble. Here I was speaking very literally, and yet by using phrases like 'far left' taken to be signalling something non-literal. In doing this I was splitting the audience into those looking for dogwhistles and those reading what i've said. If someone replied having read what i'd said, i'd take quite a different tone. That someone reacted superficially, to supposed implications that didn't exist -- well, that doesnt great any obligation on me to be anything other than ironic.
    - soco 3y ago
      Looks also like a Dunning Kruger effect. Luckily it's only a HN storm in a teacup.