Washington DC Carjacking Teenage Girls

[Ridingtosunset 129]

8 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Both sides? What sides are you referring to? What "attitudes about education within the black community" are referring to? What evidence is there that "attitudes" are the problem as opposed to lack of access and the disruption of the family unit caused by high incarceration rates? 
 

It's not valued nearly what it should be. My evidence is years of being around educators in urban areas. At some point, you have to stop screaming and pointing at high incarceration rates and figure out solutions. I'm onboard with CJ reform, but let's not kid ourselves that's the only obstacle standing in the way. 

[Kyle 207]

57 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

A pretty good start would be to stop imprisoning all the black men for drug offenses. 

Funny ... like overturning our current president's signature legislation: https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/422517-trump-signs-criminal-justice-reform-bill

[workswithseed 2119]

17 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

He appears to be black. Are we under the impression the racist, anti-Asian sentiment is solely the province of the white man? Hasn't the media narrative been that there is a rise in anti-Asian sentiment? 

Why have this at the bottom? Weird addition.

"The neighborhood where Monday’s attack occurred, Hell’s Kitchen, is predominantly white, with an Asian population of less than 20%, according to city demographic data."

[workswithseed 2119]

18 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

He appears to be black. Are we under the impression the racist, anti-Asian sentiment is solely the province of the white man? Hasn't the media narrative been that there is a rise in anti-Asian sentiment? 

Bleep bloop

Edited March 31, 2021 by workswithseed

[Dahobbs 17691]

2 minutes ago, Ridingtosunset said:

It's not valued nearly what it should be. My evidence is years of being around educators in urban areas. At some point, you have to stop screaming and pointing at high incarceration rates and figure out solutions. I'm onboard with CJ reform, but let's not kid ourselves that's the only obstacle standing in the way. 

I don't think relying on anecdotal evidence is great way to make policy. I've found plenty of articles addressing whether lack of value of education is a false premise. 

https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1090572.pdf

https://uncf.org/wp-content/uploads/reports/Advocacy_ASATTBro_4-18F_Digital.pdf

It is hard to solve a problem when you don't really know what the contours of it are or if it even really exists. And, changing attitudes is an inherently difficult task. Assuming there is an attitude problem to solve, I'd start by figuring out why the problematic attitude exists. My guess, it probably starts with societal mistreatment, e.g., absurdly high and disproportionate incarceration rate just discussed. 

[ChickenSandwich 9853]

36 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Both sides? What sides are you referring to? What "attitudes about education within the black community" are referring to? What evidence is there that "attitudes" are the problem as opposed to lack of access and the disruption of the family unit caused by high incarceration rates? 
 

Incarceration rates:

1.9 million prisoners

aprox 740,000 aa prisoners

3% of male population

 

[Stunns38 3559]

Why have this at the bottom? Weird addition.
"The neighborhood where Monday’s attack occurred, Hell’s Kitchen, is predominantly white, with an Asian population of less than 20%, according to city demographic data."

That was peculiar. Hell’s Kitchen is adjacent to Times Sq and the Port Authority which draws a ton of riff raff. Plus its seedy past hasn’t completely gone away. Regardless, irrelevant to the story and most NY’ers know the Hells Kitchen isn’t very safe even though it’s gentrified. I lived there for a few years myself.

[Ridingtosunset 129]

2 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

I don't think relying on anecdotal evidence is great way to make policy. I've found plenty of articles addressing whether lack of value of education is a false premise. 

https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1090572.pdf

https://uncf.org/wp-content/uploads/reports/Advocacy_ASATTBro_4-18F_Digital.pdf

It is hard to solve a problem when you don't really know what the contours of it are or if it even really exists. And, changing attitudes is an inherently difficult task. Assuming there is an attitude problem to solve, I'd start by figuring out why the problematic attitude exists. My guess, it probably starts with societal mistreatment, e.g., absurdly high and disproportionate incarceration rate just discussed. 

I'm not going to read through all that tonight, but I assume its based on self-analysis, which seems not a great way to measure attitudes, if such a thing is even quantifiable. Like I said, I can only go on my experience, which is probably more than most. 

Discrimination and criminal injustice play a big role. I don't dispute that. I just don't know what end game people expect from the current racial reconciliation strategy that seems to be at the forefront of news, policy, culture, sports, entertainment. Racism will always be a part of the human condition, unfortunately. We can grow, evolve, and always be better. The more our races and cultures live together, reproduce, and travel, the more we can mitigate it.  But its not going away completely, and its certainly not exclusive to white America. I just hope we're not creating a generation of racists of all colors. 

[Dahobbs 17691]

6 minutes ago, Kyle said:

Funny ... like overturning our current president's signature legislation: https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/422517-trump-signs-criminal-justice-reform-bill

I'm not sure what the bipartisan bill you linked to has to do with the current President or the 1994 Act. I'm not sure repealing the act entirely accomplishes much. Some of the more specific provisions (some supported by Biden and others not) were and are problematic (e.g., funding for building more prisons, mandatory minimums). 

2 minutes ago, workswithseed said:

Why have this at the bottom? Weird addition.

"The neighborhood where Monday’s attack occurred, Hell’s Kitchen, is predominantly white, with an Asian population of less than 20%, according to city demographic data."

I assume for context and to demonstrate that Asians were a minority in that particular area? The paragraph prior to was about the police increasing "outreach and patrols in predominantly Asian communities." 

[Brothahorn 10087]

49 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

He appears to be black. Are we under the impression the racist, anti-Asian sentiment is solely the province of the white man? Hasn't the media narrative been that there is a rise in anti-Asian sentiment? 

Perfect example of why I posted that meme earlier. 

 

Depending on where you get your news from, black people are behind the violence and have taken it to another level. Yes there has always been tension between blacks and Asians in the poor communities. Especially, where there is an Asian owned business(might be different up North). So why all of the sudden interest? And why is it being framed as some mass onslaught? Because these type of incidents didn't just start happening. 

 

And the alternative to narrative is that white supremacy is behind the rise in violence against Asians. Yet one of their biggest show cases is about sex not race. The white supremacy angle media will ignore that because a crazy sumbitch who just killed 8 people is embarrassed to be racist, obviously.

 

Before you even get to the rise in anti-Asian violence trope, you should ask yourself if this new? Or is it just being reported with a certain narrative in mind.

[Dahobbs 17691]

13 minutes ago, Brothahorn said:

Perfect example of why I posted that meme earlier. 

 

Depending on where you get your news from, black people are behind the violence and have taken it to another level. Yes there has always been tension between blacks and Asians in the poor communities. Especially, where there is an Asian owned business(might be different up North). So why all of the sudden interest? And why is it being framed as some mass onslaught? Because these type of incidents didn't just start happening. 

 

And the alternative to narrative is that white supremacy is behind the rise in violence against Asians. Yet one of their biggest show cases is about sex not race. The white supremacy angle media will ignore that because a crazy sumbitch who just killed 8 people is embarrassed to be racist, obviously.

 

Before you even get to the rise in anti-Asian violence trope, you should ask yourself if this new? Or is it just being reported with a certain narrative in mind.

I have personal, anecdotal evidence that there is a rise in anti-Asian sentiment. And frankly, I've seen it on this board as much as some people deny it.   It hasn't something my family has had to deal much with until recently. The last clear event I can remember before current events was when I was kid. So, I can believe you, or I can believe my own lying eyes and the events, news reports, videos, online comments, and inflammatory statements from politicians that they've seen 

Edited March 31, 2021 by Dahobbs

[Brothahorn 10087]

31 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

I have personal, anecdotal evidence that there is a rise in anti-Asian sentiment. And frankly, I've seen it on this board as much as some people deny it.   It hasn't something my family has had to deal much with until recently. The last clear event I can remember before current events was when I was kid. So, I can believe you, or I can believe my own lying eyes and the events, news reports, videos, online comments, and inflammatory statements from politicians that they've seen 

I wasn't necessarily trying to disprove how you see it/feel about it. If you have the evidence that supports your position, then that's what you should go with.  It was just a sample on how  incidents get twisted and become commentary instead of reporting.

[Kyle 207]

1 hour ago, Dahobbs said:

I'm not sure what the bipartisan bill you linked to has to do with the current President or the 1994 Act. I'm not sure repealing the act entirely accomplishes much. Some of the more specific provisions (some supported by Biden and others not) were and are problematic (e.g., funding for building more prisons, mandatory minimums). 

I assume for context and to demonstrate that Asians were a minority in that particular area? The paragraph prior to was about the police increasing "outreach and patrols in predominantly Asian communities." 

 

[Kyle 207]

1 hour ago, Dahobbs said:

I have personal, anecdotal evidence that there is a rise in anti-Asian sentiment.

 

[Dahobbs 17691]

2 minutes ago, Kyle said:

 

Are you suggesting that the First Step Act repealed portions of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act? I agree it was a good bill, it just didn't seem related to your post. 

[GringoSalado 1652]

8 hours ago, Nivek said:

media narrative = whatever I don't like but turns out to be true and opposite to my opinions, but my feels matter more than facts.  

 

5 hours ago, Nivek said:

Armed 13 year olds?  

 

[Message Board User 12396]

9 hours ago, Brothahorn said:

Perfect example of why I posted that meme earlier. 

 

Depending on where you get your news from, black people are behind the violence and have taken it to another level. Yes there has always been tension between blacks and Asians in the poor communities. Especially, where there is an Asian owned business(might be different up North). So why all of the sudden interest? And why is it being framed as some mass onslaught? Because these type of incidents didn't just start happening. 

 

And the alternative to narrative is that white supremacy is behind the rise in violence against Asians. Yet one of their biggest show cases is about sex not race. The white supremacy angle media will ignore that because a crazy sumbitch who just killed 8 people is embarrassed to be racist, obviously.

 

Before you even get to the rise in anti-Asian violence trope, you should ask yourself if this new? Or is it just being reported with a certain narrative in mind.

As you so often are, you are right - this belief that white supremacy is behind every evil (even those committed by non-whites) is getting more and more popular in regular media and social media.

This person has over 500,000 twitter followers:

🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪

[Message Board User 12396]

And we have an arrest.

 

[Message Board User 12396]

2 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

There are some seriously fucked up people in this country..... I'm not surprised at this drivel Dave Dennison posts under one of his twitter pseudo names Eugene Gu, and he for sure isn't an MD. Why that's one of the most white supremacist professions out there. They even wear it on their sleeve in the form of those racist, dog whistle, white lab coats that are just AMA DR issue KKK robes.   

You can call out a lot of problems with the GOP, but this kind of shit is insidious in its outright, dishonest bullshit.  The DNC has more self entitled, fart sniffing crazies per city than any back water GOP enclave.  

 

It wouldn't be so bad if it was just crackpots on the web spouting this drivel to all of their incels (and of course there are crackpots on both sides of the aisle).

But the problem I see is that the media is picking all this up and regurgitating it to the point there is very little (if any) difference from what you get from the activists and "regular" news outlets that are supposed to be objective (HA!).

E.g., 

 

[Nice Guy Eddie 13528]

11 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

A pretty good start would be to stop imprisoning all the black men for drug offenses. 

The War on Drugs destabilized entire neighborhoods and practically some cities for a couple of generations now. And now we gotta keep those private prisons full. Quarterly reports to Wall Street are due soon.

the sad part is how long does it take to reverse the damage done? A couple of generations?

 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

12 minutes ago, Message Board User said:

It wouldn't be so bad if it was just crackpots on the web spouting this drivel to all of their incels (and of course there are crackpots on both sides of the aisle).

But the problem I see is that the media is picking all this up and regurgitating it to the point there is very little (if any) difference from what you get from the activists and "regular" news outlets that are supposed to be objective (HA!).

E.g., 

 

24 hour news cycle, journalism has become a cause instead of  informing people of the facts, and letting them decide what to believe, selective coverage, and selective outrage.

Is there any wonder people don't have faith in an institution that's supposed to be a gov't watchdog not a gov't lap dog.

[TriStone 1724]

11 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

I don't think relying on anecdotal evidence is great way to make policy.

 

10 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

I have personal, anecdotal evidence that there is a rise in anti-Asian sentiment.

 

[Kyle 207]

21 minutes ago, Message Board User said:

It wouldn't be so bad if it was just crackpots on the web spouting this drivel to all of their incels (and of course there are crackpots on both sides of the aisle).

But the problem I see is that the media is picking all this up and regurgitating it to the point there is very little (if any) difference from what you get from the activists and "regular" news outlets that are supposed to be objective (HA!).

E.g., 

 

This is why the world has never experience such a group of highly educated people that are completely misinformed. If 2020 showed us anything, it was the Establishment's skill at completely shaping public opinion via misinformation. Even back to 2016 arguable half the "big stories" have been complete disinformation campaigns. Unfortunately, if you read much of shit-throwing chimps on the other board they have no idea they keep getting lied to. Only in 'murica can a largely fabricated propaganda win a pulitzer and be used to indoctrinate little authoritarians.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

3 minutes ago, TriStone said:

 

 

Yeah don't question him, he's of course right, his anecdotal evidence is always acceptable, and Cabal approved, and you're just not allowed Cabal approved double standards.... Scurry away now....

 

 

[Kyle 207]

8 minutes ago, TriStone said:

 

 

Nothing could sum up the cloak room any better.

[Kyle 207]

2 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Yeah don't question him, he's of course right, his anecdotal evidence is always acceptable, and Cabal approved, and you're just not allowed Cabal approved double standards.... Scurry away now....

This is a perfect illustration of the tension between Enlightenment-rational and Romantic-emotional ontology. I've been trying to explain that to one of my old friends who has gone completely wack-a-doodle. He genuinely believes what he feels is "truth," i.e. a fact, as opposed to what he simply believes to be true. That underscores a lot of why we talk past one another. When an Enlightenment-rational says "the sky is blue" that is because objectively, according to the scientific method, it is blue (as generally defined by the culture). However, to a Romantic-emotional, it is "blue" only to the extend that the viewer feels that it is blue.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13528]

I watched an interview with David Simon who created and wrote the Wire on HBO. The interview was a few years old. David Simon was a local reporter in Baltimore who covered the police. He wrote a book about his time with the Baltimore homicide dept which was made in the Homicide TV show in the late 90s.

Anyway, Simon mentioned that the no-snitch attitude was prevalent in Baltimore communities but that didn't mean they wanted murderers walking their street. He said that while people would not always testify in open court they would regularly call police to inform on the murderers. At that point, murders were cleared aka murderer identified in over 80% of the cases.  Now Baltimore PD clearance is regularly below 50% or even 40%. Why? Because communities have watched police policies and tactics destroy (sometimes kill) their families. They will not call the police for anything.

 

[Cajun 11750]

1 hour ago, Message Board User said:

As you so often are, you are right - this belief that white supremacy is behind every evil (even those committed by non-whites) is getting more and more popular in regular media and social media.

This person has over 500,000 twitter followers:

🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪

JFC.

Doesn't say much for having an MD.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

Just now, Cajun said:

JFC.

Doesn't say much for having an MD.

MD.....Manic Depressive....  its a different thing.

[Cajun 11750]

28 minutes ago, TriStone said:

 

 

Beat me to it.

Can't make this shit up.

[Cajun 11750]

1 hour ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

24 hour news cycle, journalism has become a cause instead of  informing people of the facts, and letting them decide what to believe, selective coverage, and selective outrage.

Is there any wonder people don't have faith in an institution that's supposed to be a gov't watchdog not a gov't lap dog.

There is almost no jounalism at this point.

Activists with film crews and microphones is about it.

They don't even try to hide their fraud anyomore. 

Edited March 31, 2021 by Cajun

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

1 minute ago, Cajun said:

There is almost no jounalism at this point.

Activists with film crews and microphones is about it.

They don't even try to hide their fraud anyomore. 

I've listened to On point (I think it was On point) interviews with "journalists" stating who, what, when, where, and why were outdated journalistic concepts.  If that's the case then change the name of the profession to professional propagandists.  When the media tailors its reporting to support one party over another the profession is dead.

[TriStone 1724]

12 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

I've listened to On point (I think it was On point) interviews with "journalists" stating who, what, when, where, and why were outdated journalistic concepts.

Jim Lehrer was probably the last true journalist.  His Rules of Journalism should be THE standard by which the profession is judged.

Jim Lehrer's Rules of Journalism:

• Do nothing I cannot defend.
• Do not distort, lie, slant or hype.
• Do not falsify facts or make up quotes.
• Cover, write and present every story with the care I would want if the story were about me.
• Assume there is at least one other side or version to every story.
• Assume the viewer is as smart and caring and good a person as I am.
• Assume the same about all people on whom I report.
• Assume everyone is innocent until proven guilty.
• Assume personal lives are a private matter until a legitimate turn in the story mandates otherwise.
• Carefully separate opinion and analysis from straight news stories and clearly label it as such.
• Do not use anonymous sources or blind quotes except on rare and monumental occasions. No one should ever be allowed to attack another anonymously.
• Do not broadcast profanity or the end result of violence unless it is an integral and necessary part of the story and/or crucial to its understanding.
• Acknowledge that objectivity may be impossible but fairness never is.
• Journalists who are reckless with facts and reputations should be disciplined by their employers.
• My viewers have a right to know what principles guide my work and the process I use in their practice.
• I am not in the entertainment business. 

 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

2 minutes ago, TriStone said:

Jim Lehrer was probably the last true journalist.  His Rules of Journalism should be THE standard by which the profession is judged.

Jim Lehrer's Rules of Journalism:

• Do nothing I cannot defend.
• Do not distort, lie, slant or hype.
• Do not falsify facts or make up quotes.
• Cover, write and present every story with the care I would want if the story were about me.
• Assume there is at least one other side or version to every story.
• Assume the viewer is as smart and caring and good a person as I am.
• Assume the same about all people on whom I report.
• Assume everyone is innocent until proven guilty.
• Assume personal lives are a private matter until a legitimate turn in the story mandates otherwise.
• Carefully separate opinion and analysis from straight news stories and clearly label it as such.
• Do not use anonymous sources or blind quotes except on rare and monumental occasions. No one should ever be allowed to attack another anonymously.
• Do not broadcast profanity or the end result of violence unless it is an integral and necessary part of the story and/or crucial to its understanding.
• Acknowledge that objectivity may be impossible but fairness never is.
• Journalists who are reckless with facts and reputations should be disciplined by their employers.
• My viewers have a right to know what principles guide my work and the process I use in their practice.
• I am not in the entertainment business. 

 

The last point sums up modern journalism.  The rest would be laughed at by most of them today, even though they think (giving the some benefit of the doubt here) they're being honest, and unbiased because the truth (their truth ) is what they're telling you.

[Dahobbs 17691]

1 hour ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Yeah don't question him, he's of course right, his anecdotal evidence is always acceptable, and Cabal approved, and you're just not allowed Cabal approved double standards.... Scurry away now....

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Kyle said:

Nothing could sum up the cloak room any better.

 

1 hour ago, Kyle said:

This is a perfect illustration of the tension between Enlightenment-rational and Romantic-emotional ontology. I've been trying to explain that to one of my old friends who has gone completely wack-a-doodle. He genuinely believes what he feels is "truth," i.e. a fact, as opposed to what he simply believes to be true. That underscores a lot of why we talk past one another. When an Enlightenment-rational says "the sky is blue" that is because objectively, according to the scientific method, it is blue (as generally defined by the culture). However, to a Romantic-emotional, it is "blue" only to the extend that the viewer feels that it is blue.

Y'all are hilarious. 

1) I was very specific with my wording. Anecdotal evidence is a poor guide for policy decisions. That doesn't mean anecdotal evidence is worthless, and I never suggested it was. So long as you understand the potential limitations, anecdotal evidence can still be useful.  

2) On the topic of increasing anti-Asian sentiment, I intentionally used the word anecdotal as an acknowledgement of its limitations. I then buttressed my anecdotal experience with broader observational data (e.g., trends in rhetoric on this site, social media, and by public figures). Those observations are also consistent with FBI data that shows an increase in anti-Asian hate crimes since 2015. From informal observation, the greatest rise has been since the outbreak of Covid-19. Unfortunately, hard data from 2020 isn't yet available as far as I know. I was countering pure speculation with the types of evidence currently available. But I wasn't advocating for any broad policy action, which in my view would require more robust data to particularly identify the contours and causes of a problem. 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

1 minute ago, Dahobbs said:

 

 

Y'all are hilarious. 

1) I was very specific with my wording. Anecdotal evidence is a poor guide for policy decisions. That doesn't mean anecdotal evidence is worthless, and I never suggested it was. So long as you understand the potential limitations, anecdotal evidence can still be useful.  

2) On the topic of increasing anti-Asian sentiment, I intentionally used the word anecdotal as an acknowledgement of its limitations. I then buttressed my anecdotal experience with broader observational data (e.g., trends in rhetoric on this site, social media, and by public figures). Those observations are also consistent with FBI data that shows an increase in anti-Asian hate crimes since 2015. From informal observation, the greatest rise has been since the outbreak of Covid-19. Unfortunately, hard data from 2020 isn't yet available as far as I know. I was countering pure speculation with the types of evidence currently available. But I wasn't advocating for any broad policy action, which in my view would require more robust data to particularly identify the contours and causes of a problem. 

Any time someone here uses anecdotal evidence they get shouted down... especially when that anecdotal evidence doesn't support someones particular vision of the situation.

[Kyle 207]

4 hours ago, Message Board User said:

As you so often are, you are right - this belief that white supremacy is behind every evil (even those committed by non-whites) is getting more and more popular in regular media and social media.

"White Supremacy" is this year's new undefinable all-encompassing bogeyman for everything I don't like.

[Dahobbs 17691]

34 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Any time someone here uses anecdotal evidence they get shouted down... especially when that anecdotal evidence doesn't support someones particular vision of the situation.

It depends on what they are using it for and whether they acknowledge the limitations of the evidence. For instance, anecdotal evidence can be useful as a signal that an issue may need more study. If you gather enough anecdotal evidence from multiple sources, you can ameliorate reliability and reproducibility concerns. And, anecdotal evidence can be useful to humanize or illustrate a particular issue. The problem occurs when someone relies solely on anecdotal evidence to reach definitive conclusions or to make broad policy decisions. But it is far from useless and is often relied upon in scientific literature (e.g., medical case reports). 

[Dahobbs 17691]

12 minutes ago, Kyle said:

"White Supremacy" is this year's new undefinable all-encompassing bogeyman for everything I don't like.

Actually, it appears that "media reports of white supremacy" are this year's new undefinable all-encompassing bogeyman for everything you don't like. 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

7 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

It depends on what they are using it for and whether they acknowledge the limitations of the evidence. For instance, anecdotal evidence can be useful as a signal that an issue may need more study. If you gather enough anecdotal evidence from multiple sources, you can ameliorate reliability and reproducibility concerns. And, anecdotal evidence can be useful to humanize or illustrate a particular issue. The problem occurs when someone relies solely on anecdotal evidence to reach definitive conclusions or to make broad policy decisions. But it is far from useless and is often relied upon in scientific literature (e.g., medical case reports). 

Maybe, but here you get shouted down with yeah nice anecdotal evidence but fuck off, I don't believe you, I have my hands over my ears, yada yada yada...  

You know that, and still are trying to defend it.  So next time somebody uses it, and gets shouted down, trot out your post.

[52-80 19262]

14 hours ago, Stunns38 said:

That was peculiar. Hell’s Kitchen is adjacent to Times Sq and the Port Authority which draws a ton of riff raff. Plus its seedy past hasn’t completely gone away. Regardless, irrelevant to the story and most NY’ers know the Hells Kitchen isn’t very safe even though it’s gentrified. I lived there for a few years myself.

The real takeaway from this is that Daredevil is so blind to racism that he wont even protect the yellow people

[Brisketexan 105432]

3 hours ago, Kyle said:

This is a perfect illustration of the tension between Enlightenment-rational and Romantic-emotional ontology. I've been trying to explain that to one of my old friends who has gone completely wack-a-doodle. He genuinely believes what he feels is "truth," i.e. a fact, as opposed to what he simply believes to be true. That underscores a lot of why we talk past one another. When an Enlightenment-rational says "the sky is blue" that is because objectively, according to the scientific method, it is blue (as generally defined by the culture). However, to a Romantic-emotional, it is "blue" only to the extend that the viewer feels that it is blue.

You make half a point.  It's accurate, but incomplete.

It is a phenomenon of post-modernism that "truth" (which should be largely an objective, fact-based concept) is subordinate to perception.  If I FEEL that something is true, that makes my feeling true, regardless of the objective facts.  That doesn't mean that perception is irrelevant -- the person dropping the bombs clearly perceives the event of a bombing raid MUCH differently than the target of the bombs does.  Perception IS relevant and important in reporting on the overall story.  But in both stories, the FACTS are the same: planes from country X dropped bombs on structures in country Y.

But the second half of your point is something that doesn't even fit in that post-modernist "perception" exception.  And that is the tendency of a large chunk of society to believe in actual, objective "facts" that are not facts at all.  See Qanon, all that shit.  Their beliefs are not driven by their perception of a factual situation - they are driven by belief in facts that just....aren't real.  John Podesta doesn't drink baby's blood.  Joe Biden isn't Trump with a face transplant.  And the list could go on for pages, those are just some of the crazier ones.

A disconnect from objective reality is a problem.  It's a problem when it is done because of perception, although that's harder to tease out, because perception indeed does color one's reality -- but allowing it to subsume objective reality is a bridge too far.  It's like food -- you need it, but clearly, if you consume too much, you're doing more harm than good.  Post-modernist thinking takes the reasonable point of "consider a person's perspective and perception" too far -- and at the extreme, it becomes totally irrational.  But this disconnect is also a huge problem when you have a whole segment of the population who believes in "alternative objective facts" (I mean, that term literally was used by leadership within the past 4 years).  In the story about the bombing raid, it is unsupportable to believe that you were actually bombed by alien spaceships, piloted by a secret organization of Space Jews.  Those are factual beliefs -- they are objectively true or false -- and you hold a belief that is objectively and verifiably false.

I don't see how we get back to any sort of reality-based culture.

[52-80 19262]

 

FBI-compiled anti-race incidents from 2015 to 2019.  (2020 data not available)

please match the race to the color see if it fits with narrative

 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

You make half a point.  It's accurate, but incomplete.

It is a phenomenon of post-modernism that "truth" (which should be largely an objective, fact-based concept) is subordinate to perception.  If I FEEL that something is true, that makes my feeling true, regardless of the objective facts.  That doesn't mean that perception is irrelevant -- the person dropping the bombs clearly perceives the event of a bombing raid MUCH differently than the target of the bombs does.  Perception IS relevant and important in reporting on the overall story.  But in both stories, the FACTS are the same: planes from country X dropped bombs on structures in country Y.

But the second half of your point is something that doesn't even fit in that post-modernist "perception" exception.  And that is the tendency of a large chunk of society to believe in actual, objective "facts" that are not facts at all.  See Qanon, all that shit.  Their beliefs are not driven by their perception of a factual situation - they are driven by belief in facts that just....aren't real.  John Podesta doesn't drink baby's blood.  Joe Biden isn't Trump with a face transplant.  And the list could go on for pages, those are just some of the crazier ones.

A disconnect from objective reality is a problem.  It's a problem when it is done because of perception, although that's harder to tease out, because perception indeed does color one's reality -- but allowing it to subsume objective reality is a bridge too far.  It's like food -- you need it, but clearly, if you consume too much, you're doing more harm than good.  Post-modernist thinking takes the reasonable point of "consider a person's perspective and perception" too far -- and at the extreme, it becomes totally irrational.  But this disconnect is also a huge problem when you have a whole segment of the population who believes in "alternative objective facts" (I mean, that term literally was used by leadership within the past 4 years).  In the story about the bombing raid, it is unsupportable to believe that you were actually bombed by alien spaceships, piloted by a secret organization of Space Jews.  Those are factual beliefs -- they are objectively true or false -- and you hold a belief that is objectively and verifiably false.

I don't see how we get back to any sort of reality-based culture.

We start with little steps, like our press corps doing its job instead of playing to one party or another.  (up until the late 70's you didn't really know what political view points a news anchor had (SEE: Walter Cronkite). 

The current border issue is a prefect example of that right now. Over crowded conditions at the dentition centers, but no screaming about brutality by this admin.  And don't say it was just about kids, and parents being separated because it was about the conditions, "cages" as well.   They're just now apparently going to allow the media in to see the conditions.

[Kyle 207]

8 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

You make half a point.  It's accurate, but incomplete.

It is a phenomenon of post-modernism that "truth" (which should be largely an objective, fact-based concept) is subordinate to perception.  If I FEEL that something is true, that makes my feeling true, regardless of the objective facts.  That doesn't mean that perception is irrelevant -- the person dropping the bombs clearly perceives the event of a bombing raid MUCH differently than the target of the bombs does.  Perception IS relevant and important in reporting on the overall story.  But in both stories, the FACTS are the same: planes from country X dropped bombs on structures in country Y.

But the second half of your point is something that doesn't even fit in that post-modernist "perception" exception.  And that is the tendency of a large chunk of society to believe in actual, objective "facts" that are not facts at all.  See Qanon, all that shit.  Their beliefs are not driven by their perception of a factual situation - they are driven by belief in facts that just....aren't real.  John Podesta doesn't drink baby's blood.  Joe Biden isn't Trump with a face transplant.  And the list could go on for pages, those are just some of the crazier ones.

A disconnect from objective reality is a problem.  It's a problem when it is done because of perception, although that's harder to tease out, because perception indeed does color one's reality -- but allowing it to subsume objective reality is a bridge too far.  It's like food -- you need it, but clearly, if you consume too much, you're doing more harm than good.  Post-modernist thinking takes the reasonable point of "consider a person's perspective and perception" too far -- and at the extreme, it becomes totally irrational.  But this disconnect is also a huge problem when you have a whole segment of the population who believes in "alternative objective facts" (I mean, that term literally was used by leadership within the past 4 years).  In the story about the bombing raid, it is unsupportable to believe that you were actually bombed by alien spaceships, piloted by a secret organization of Space Jews.  Those are factual beliefs -- they are objectively true or false -- and you hold a belief that is objectively and verifiably false.

I don't see how we get back to any sort of reality-based culture.

And I agree and did not feel the need to go into every single aspect. Said another way, one may legitimately believes his feelings reflect reality; however, that does not mean they do. For the first time I'm very pessimistic about ever being able to re-center around anything resembling some sort of objective truth and reality-based conversations. We can debate tax rates, environment, defense, and immigration, but we cannot debate if we cannot even agree on what is a tax. Concurrent with the media and influencers completely abdicating any desire to promote fact-based information and social media's inherent talent at pouring gasoline on the worst instincts of tribalism, not sure how it's possible to return to adults talking.

Edited March 31, 2021 by Kyle

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

56 minutes ago, Kyle said:

"White Supremacy" is this year's new undefinable all-encompassing bogeyman for everything I don't like.

Yeah it's a tired meme. 

[Brisketexan 105432]

5 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

We start with little steps, like our press corps doing its job instead of playing to one party or another.  (up until the late 70's you didn't really know what political view points a news anchor had (SEE: Walter Cronkite). 

The current border issue is a prefect example of that right now. Over crowded conditions at the dentition centers, but no screaming about brutality by this admin.  And don't say it was just about kids, and parents being separated because it was about the conditions, "cages" as well.   They're just now apparently going to allow the media in to see the conditions.

Yet you miss the OBJECTIVE facts behind that, kind of making my point - in terms of numbers coming to our border, the complaint about a crisis, etc......do not match up with the facts.  It has been MUCH worse before:

 

You raised that example, and I think it's a good one.  The story is about lots of people coming here and creating a humanitarian crisis.  That story, factually, is not any more true than it was over the past ten years, generally speaking.

If, however, the story is setting up a system that separates families ON PURPOSE, with the intention of using that terrifying outcome as a tool of terror to deter immigration.....that story was one story under the previous admin, and an entirely different story under the current admin.

If, alternatively, the story is about just the circumstance of detention -- overcrowding, inhumane conditions -- THAT story indeed has been ongoing, and is one for which the admins over the past 10 years (including the current one) bear responsibility and must answer for.

What is the fact/story?  Is it "lots of immigrants are coming?"  Is it "we have a policy of separating families to scare them into not coming here?"  Is it "we detain and house immigrants in inhumane conditions?"

 

I agree that the death of the fairness doctrine and even the GOAL of objectivity has done incredible harm -- no argument from me there.  But we the consumers bear a great deal of responsibility for that as well, because we can take the same set of objective facts and turn it into the greater story that we want to hear, and want to believe.

All three of the things I posted above are objectively true: 1) illegal immigration numbers are not abnormally high right now; 2) the previous admin had a purposeful policy of separating families in order to scare them into not coming; and 3) we do not have and have not had a good approach at detaining immigrants humanely.  Those are facts.  But the story you tell with those facts....emphasizing one, ignoring others, or vice versa....can be very different.

[Brisketexan 105432]

12 minutes ago, Kyle said:

Concurrent with the media and influencers completely abdicating any desire to promote fact-based information and social media's inherent talent at pouring gasoline on the worst instincts of tribalism, not sure how it's possible to return to adults talking.

Huh.  Sounds familiar.   Have you looked into The Ledge?  We don't have many prime spots left, but I suspect there's still some room.

[High Plains Drifter 11052]

 

4 hours ago, Kyle said:

Nothing could sum up the cloak room any better.

 

 

This thread is more cloak roomy than the cloak room.

 

At least in the cloak room, people are honest about the fact that they are talking politics, insulting the other side, and expressing their feels and opinions.

 

 

 

 

 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

25 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Huh.  Sounds familiar.   Have you looked into The Ledge?  We don't have many prime spots left, but I suspect there's still some room.

What's ledge space renting our for these days ?