Pseudohistory

@edgarblythe,

It's why we were in the streets during Vietnam.

0 Replies

@edgarblythe,

Should we have just let WWII Japan carry on their campaign of genocide against everyone (eventually including us) because any effort to resist them might kill a civilian?

1 Reply

@oralloy,

You know we had them on their heels. Some 'experts' say they would have fought to the last man if the bombs had not been used. But we don't know that. It may be common knowledge, but common knowledge is often not so in new circumstances.

1 Reply

@edgarblythe,

edgarblythe wrote:

You know we had them on their heels.

We had them on their heels because of a whole lot of fighting that caused a whole lot of collateral damage.

edgarblythe wrote:

Some 'experts' say they would have fought to the last man if the bombs had not been used. But we don't know that.

We stopped attacking them once they surrendered. It was up to them when they surrendered.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

If you were my general and I were the president you would be sent back to Fort Hood for the duration.

1 Reply

@edgarblythe,

If you refused to fight Japan after Pearl Harbor, you'd lose the next election.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Actually, I rather enjoy it when someone proves my ideas wrong. What I can't stand is being bored.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

Quote:

There are hard facts in history that can be falsified. I do it all the time with progressives who go into hysterics over Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It's not a big issue of discussion on a2k, but there are other places on the internet.

You seem to be having a hard time with the concept of falsifiability criteria. Let me see if I can explain it better for you..

You apply falsifiability criteria to your own ideas. You do this to show that your ideas are testable, and that you have questioned your own beliefs. You don't "falsify" the beliefs of people with whom you disagree.

Critical thinking means questioning your own beliefs and probing the weakness of your own arguments. Questioning the beliefs of people on the other side is nothing special; it is just normal partisan bluster.

2 Replies

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

You apply falsifiability criteria to your own ideas. You do this to show that your ideas are testable, and that you have questioned your own beliefs.

My beliefs pass all tests.

maxdancona wrote:

You don't "falsify" the beliefs of people with whom you disagree.

I do it all the time.

maxdancona wrote:

Critical thinking means questioning your own beliefs and probing the weakness of your own arguments.

As I said, my beliefs pass all tests.

maxdancona wrote:

Questioning the beliefs of people on the other side is nothing special; it is just normal partisan bluster.

Pointing out when other people are wrong, and backing it up with evidence when people ask for a cite, is more than just bluster.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

My beliefs pass all tests.

This made me laugh (I hope you meant it as humor).

If your beliefs pass all tests, then they can't be held to a "falsifiability". This means that they don't function as factual beliefs. They are just your opinions. Of course, your opinions can function perfectly well as facts inside the reality you constructed for yourself.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

This made me laugh (I hope you meant it as humor).

No humor is intended.

maxdancona wrote:

If your beliefs pass all tests, then they can't be held to a "falsifiability". This means that they don't function as factual beliefs. They are just your opinions. Of course, your opinions can function perfectly well as facts inside the reality you constructed for yourself.

That is incorrect. What it means is that I am right.

There is no such thing as a constructed reality.

Reality is reality.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

That's exactly what someone living in a reality of their own construction would say.

Someone living in the "real reality" has to accept that they aren't always right, and that their opinions don't function as fact.

(yeah yeah, I know your facts are real facts. That's my point.)

1 Reply

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

If you refused to fight Japan after Pearl Harbor, you'd lose the next election.

Actually, if you can go back and change history you would be dumb to start with Pearl Harbor when you could go back to the origins of our relationship with Japan and build a relationship based on trust and justice.

1 Reply

@edgarblythe,

That goes along with a statement I created a long time ago.

"Unintended consequences are not necessarily unanticipated consequences."

1 Reply

@roger,

Yes sir, for sure.

0 Replies

@edgarblythe,

Are you saying that your answer to WWII Japan's ruthless campaign of genocide would have been to be Japan's close and trusted friend during this period?

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

That's exactly what someone living in a reality of their own construction would say.

It's also what someone who is right, and informed enough to know that they are right, would say.

maxdancona wrote:

Someone living in the "real reality" has to accept that they aren't always right,

I've been wrong from time to time on a side issue that I'd made an assumption about. It's happened about six times throughout the history of a2k.

maxdancona wrote:

and that their opinions don't function as fact.

I never call my opinions fact.

Quite often progressives call my facts opinions. Their claims are not accurate.

maxdancona wrote:

yeah yeah, I know your facts are real facts. That's my point.

So you understand that what I say is correct?

1 Reply

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

Are you saying that your answer to WWII Japan's ruthless campaign of genocide would have been to be Japan's close and trusted friend during this period?

That's not even close. You might want to re-read what EB wrote.

1 Reply

@glitterbag,

Well then what exactly does it mean to have a relationship with a genocidal monster that is based on trust and justice?

0 Replies

@oralloy,

If you are inside your own reality of your own making, you can say things like that without sounding silly. I have never seen anyone puff himself up like that since Jesus declared "everyone who is of the truth hears my voice" (hopefully you are not claiming to be the only begotten son of God).

It takes real intelligence to lose an argument. Any one with a keyboard can declare themselves to be right.

1 Reply

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know