Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

That's awful...

Yup. Genuine sympathy for the deceased and the husband.

It’s a brutal way to find out you’ve been fooled.

This is off topic, but conspiracy-ish I suppose... And related because of looking at that article...

With Covid being shown to be more potent in people who are obese, do you think the 'obese and proud' crew and their supporters, like Tess Holiday have had their position diminished? It's 'their body' to do as they please etc...

I'm fairly liberal in my outlook on life, and I think people should be able to live their life how they want as long as it does not impact upon others, however, in a pandemic where at times beds and medical attention is stretched, is it not putting other people at risk by being obese, if you are more likely to get ill, in a more severe manor, and needing extensive resources used on you by not maintaining a healthy lifestyle?

I am also very aware a plethora of baggage that accompanies obesity, or can cause it and I'm sensitive to that also, so the above is is more for people who actually are obese because they are lazy and/or don't prioritise their health.

I'm conflicted on this view point anyway, it goes against my ethos to instruct someone on how to live their life.... hmmm

The Protocols of Zion lead to millions of deaths. I don’t understand why you brought the Coronavirus—a topic banned on Dakka—into this thread after telling us not to discuss one of the most harmful conspiracy theories of all time or its modern configuration.

I mean, I’m not saying you shouldn’t post that or that we shouldn’t discuss it. I’m saying I’d appreciate being able to discuss the other elephants in the Conspiracy Theory room, especially when they will cost real lives in the near future. You want to warn people about dangerous conspiracy theories? Then by all means, please warn people about dangerous conspiracy theories.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

endlesswaltz123 wrote:
This is off topic, but conspiracy-ish I suppose... And related because of looking at that article...

With Covid being shown to be more potent in people who are obese, do you think the 'obese and proud' crew and their supporters, like Tess Holiday have had their position diminished? It's 'their body' to do as they please etc...

I'm fairly liberal in my outlook on life, and I think people should be able to live their life how they want as long as it does not impact upon others, however, in a pandemic where at times beds and medical attention is stretched, is it not putting other people at risk by being obese, if you are more likely to get ill, in a more severe manor, and needing extensive resources used on you by not maintaining a healthy lifestyle?

I am also very aware a plethora of baggage that accompanies obesity, or can cause it and I'm sensitive to that also, so the above is is more for people who actually are obese because they are lazy and/or don't prioritise their health.

I'm conflicted on this view point anyway, it goes against my ethos to instruct someone on how to live their life.... hmmm

It is very difficult for a lot of people to lose weight and keep it off. There’s a lot of finger pointing and blame around obesity, and I suspect a lot of the proud obese are just reacting defensively against that.

That said, obese people tend to have better recoveries after surgery and handle some illnesses better than non-obese people. There’s a lot we don’t know about the health impact of obesity. In fact, unless new information has come to light, I thought obesity was pretty far down the list of conditions that left a person vulnerable to COVID.

I would love to see more rigorous science applied to weight loss, especially which factors make particular diets or methods more of less effective for different people, but right now there is just too much money is shaming people and then selling the cure to that shame.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
The Protocols of Zion lead to millions of deaths. I don’t understand why you brought the Coronavirus—a topic banned on Dakka—into this thread after telling us not to discuss one of the most harmful conspiracy theories of all time or its modern configuration.

I mean, I’m not saying you shouldn’t post that or that we shouldn’t discuss it. I’m saying I’d appreciate being able to discuss the other elephants in the Conspiracy Theory room, especially when they will cost real lives in the near future. You want to warn people about dangerous conspiracy theories? Then by all means, please warn people about dangerous conspiracy theories.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

endlesswaltz123 wrote:
This is off topic, but conspiracy-ish I suppose... And related because of looking at that article...

With Covid being shown to be more potent in people who are obese, do you think the 'obese and proud' crew and their supporters, like Tess Holiday have had their position diminished? It's 'their body' to do as they please etc...

I'm fairly liberal in my outlook on life, and I think people should be able to live their life how they want as long as it does not impact upon others, however, in a pandemic where at times beds and medical attention is stretched, is it not putting other people at risk by being obese, if you are more likely to get ill, in a more severe manor, and needing extensive resources used on you by not maintaining a healthy lifestyle?

I am also very aware a plethora of baggage that accompanies obesity, or can cause it and I'm sensitive to that also, so the above is is more for people who actually are obese because they are lazy and/or don't prioritise their health.

I'm conflicted on this view point anyway, it goes against my ethos to instruct someone on how to live their life.... hmmm

It is very difficult for a lot of people to lose weight and keep it off. There’s a lot of finger pointing and blame around obesity, and I suspect a lot of the proud obese are just reacting defensively against that.

That said, obese people tend to have better recoveries after surgery and handle some illnesses better than non-obese people. There’s a lot we don’t know about the health impact of obesity. In fact, unless new information has come to light, I thought obesity was pretty far down the list of conditions that left a person vulnerable to COVID.

I would love to see more rigorous science applied to weight loss, especially which factors make particular diets or methods more of less effective for different people, but right now there is just too much money is shaming people and then selling the cure to that shame.

It’s a live example of where CT thinking can lead, albeit in extremis.

And COVID isn’t, to the best of my knowledge, banned on Dakka. Rather the main thread was locked because of constant derailment (of which I am guilty myself)

Now, the weight issue? As a lard arse myself, I’m ill placed to comment. Granted I’m not particularly large. I’m 6’2”, 17 Stone at last weigh in. And I could certainly do something about it if I had discipline in the right area.

But body weight is a massively complex issue. Psychological, physiological etc, people vary quite wildly. So I think I’ll have to rule it out as a topic of this thread. Because some (hi!) won’t do something about it, and some can’t do something about it. And trying to parse which is which is a fool’s errand. So let’s just not, yeah?

I wouldn't mind discussing some of the weird fads that border on CT in the realm of weight loss. I have friends who went way off the deep end with Paleo/Keto/Vegan/whatever diets who ended up circling the wagons about any information that their diets were harmful. I know a dude who believes a specific kind of exercise is the only answer, and that the obese and big money people keep it a secret because it clears one's thinking and produces natural happiness.

As for differences, my wife and I are about the same age, height and often weight. I have a few congenital heart defects and a heart block that limit my exercise options. She has severe asthma (pneumonia 4 times in 3 years) that limits her exercise. We both go on the same healthy eating kicks, and I lose 20 pounds in a couple months while she loses nothing. Once we've lost the weight, we can be eating the same things in the same proportions, but suddenly gain a ton due to stress or illness or something. There's clearly a lot we don't know about maintaining a healthy weight. Whenever we try to get medical advice, we end up bombarded by questionable info or misinformation.


Of course it's all for naught if someone shoots up our synagogue or bombs out our workplaces when the pandemic is over.

Hence weight is a genuinely personal issue, and not suited to this thread.

Yes. A lot of diets are essentially crash diets, and not life long alternatives. In moderation, the risk of harm is pretty low. But as a lifestyle, yeah let’s just not.

Sorry if it seems I’m shutting it down because it’s a personal issue. It’s really not that. Call me a fat knacker, and you’re being factually accurate. I’ve a thick skin, and I know if I hit the gym I’d be alright, and that I simply can’t be bothered.

But for far too many folk to be comfortable, that’s not always the case.

So let’s all agree to disagree on that topic, whatever your leaning, and move on. No blame laid at endlesswaltz’s door here either.

I'm a little confused why you keep shutting down discussions that fit under the subject of conspiracy theories. You didn't want to talk about the big, heavy, harmful stuff, nor the er, lighter stuff. Did you not want to talk about conspiracy theories at all?

I suppose weight/diet/obesity is not really conspiracy, however a lot is due to misinformation which is closely linked but not the same thing.

Most misinformation that comes from diet is caused by people trying to make quick and easy money btw. I am in no way good shape currently, but I could have six pack abs in the space of 6 days if needed via extreme water manipulation, posing and lighting... Those 'transformation' pics you see on social media etc... Yeah, a lot of it is grade A BS.

More than happy to have the discussion elsewhere, I also can answer a lot of questions in regards to weight/diet etc (my day job, sport science lecturer, also a PT) if any are interested, also happy to give advice about exercise and training.

Given the amount of blend between 'conspiracy theories' and 'general misinformation' I can see why it would be difficult to figure out exactly where a given topic falls.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Yup. Genuine sympathy for the deceased and the husband.

It’s a brutal way to find out you’ve been fooled.

A man is told by a highway patrol officer to move off the road because a vehicle is coming and it could hit him. The man is also told by an anonymous person online that there is no vehicle and he will be safe. The man stays on the road, gets hit, and dies.

I have no sympathy for those involved. It was a very direct case of action to consequence; to me I see it like sympathy for someone having wet clothes after they jumped into a pond. At MOST I would have pity for them being so stupid. I would go so far as to say that I think lending sympathy to such people helps perpetuate the problem by creating a sense that it was to some degree not their fault, and that their own actions did not have consequences.

Put more simply: I think lending sympathy in cases like this is coddling people and ultimately harming them in the long term. I also think there is not an abundance of sympathy to go around and there ARE an abundance of people suffering in ways that are not their own fault, who could really have their lives brightened just a bit by that sympathy.

There's part of me that agrees with you, it was an idiotic stance to have. Have we not all been idiots at some point in life though? Have you never been wrong about something? Unfortunately he was wrong about COVID and it has cost his wife her life..... I hope no other people make such a costly mistake in their lives for the rest of eternity.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
I'm a little confused why you keep shutting down discussions that fit under the subject of conspiracy theories. You didn't want to talk about the big, heavy, harmful stuff, nor the er, lighter stuff. Did you not want to talk about conspiracy theories at all?

Steering it away from Politics, Religion and Personal is all.

endlesswaltz123 wrote:
There's part of me that agrees with you, it was an idiotic stance to have. Have we not all been idiots at some point in life though? Have you never been wrong about something? Unfortunately he was wrong about COVID and it has cost his wife her life..... I hope no other people make such a costly mistake in their lives for the rest of eternity.

Oh man I have been wrong about so many things, messed up so many times. "That was a result of your actions" was never something I wanted to hear but it was something I learned from hearing (though obviously timing & phrasing are essential elements). At any rate, the risk of death was one both he and his wife chose to accept. I know that when I go into a situation where I am accepting that risk I would not want those around me to be burning sympathy should the worst happen; I made that gamble and it didn't go my way, but it was my gamble to make. Save the sympathy for when something bad happens and it isn't the person's fault, we all know there's way too much of that in the world.

But I also think it would be disingenuous to not claim there is some element of defense mechanism in all this for me. So much nasty stuff happens all the time that writing off things which were self-inflicted becomes a necessary emotional shield to avoid an inordinate amount of anguish.

endlesswaltz123 wrote:
There's part of me that agrees with you, it was an idiotic stance to have. Have we not all been idiots at some point in life though? Have you never been wrong about something? Unfortunately he was wrong about COVID and it has cost his wife her life..... I hope no other people make such a costly mistake in their lives for the rest of eternity.

While I agree that nobody manages to go through their life without being an idiot and hugely wrong about things at least once I think there's a difference in terms of what it is you're wrong about. Ultimately, if somebody wants to claim 9/11 was an inside job, for example, that's a stance that doesn't really do much harm in isolation. It could have wider repercussions if it's also linked to certain political or religious leanings I suppose. If you want to claim a highly infectious disease is a hoax you better be 100% sure you're right given the cost of being wrong.

In cases like this I think there are a series of failures at many levels, some of which the people involved need to take responsibility for and some of which are societal failures. One thing I think the British and US school systems are absolutely abysmal at, for example, is teaching people how to think critically. We don't really learn about the power of science and reason/logic in British schools (or we didn't 25 years ago when I was at school). Instead we learn about equations and processes and call it science. I think that exacerbates the problems of people who see science as this mysterious black box and therefore mistrust its conclusions. If you're a grown adult and you think a virus with millions of confirmed cases and hundreds of thousands of confirmed deaths worldwide is a hoax you're an idiot. However, if you've been ill-equipped to understand how to think critically at least some of the blame for that idiocy is not yours alone. Doesn't make you any less of an idiot, of course.

Maybe he's highly naive, easily manipulated, very impressionable... Maybe they both were... Sometimes you have to accept people for one reason or another to not make a balanced or reasoned decision, and sometimes it's other peoples influence that has a factor in that.

I'm not saying this is going on in this thread but I don't think piling on him which people will inevitably do, probably calling him all sorts of names etc is the right, or a nice thing to do right now.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slipspace wrote:

endlesswaltz123 wrote:
There's part of me that agrees with you, it was an idiotic stance to have. Have we not all been idiots at some point in life though? Have you never been wrong about something? Unfortunately he was wrong about COVID and it has cost his wife her life..... I hope no other people make such a costly mistake in their lives for the rest of eternity.

In cases like this I think there are a series of failures at many levels, some of which the people involved need to take responsibility for and some of which are societal failures. One thing I think the British and US school systems are absolutely abysmal at, for example, is teaching people how to think critically. We don't really learn about the power of science and reason/logic in British schools (or we didn't 25 years ago when I was at school). Instead we learn about equations and processes and call it science. I think that exacerbates the problems of people who see science as this mysterious black box and therefore mistrust its conclusions. If you're a grown adult and you think a virus with millions of confirmed cases and hundreds of thousands of confirmed deaths worldwide is a hoax you're an idiot. However, if you've been ill-equipped to understand how to think critically at least some of the blame for that idiocy is not yours alone. Doesn't make you any less of an idiot, of course.

As a teacher, in Britain, and one that teaches science and specifically critical thinking... The reason why you don't learn it at younger ages, typically in state schools is because it requires a lot of higher order thinking, and also, you need to be able to utilise base principles and equations to validate any criticism of a concept... How can you utilise a counter argument if you cannot prove the base principles of the counter argument is correct?

Teaching all of those base principles is firstly time consuming, and requires numerous repetitions and practice of it, it takes all of your base school education to cover it.

Then, referring to higher order thinking, unfortunately some people are not capable of that.. This is why it is so important to not spread misinformation, especially in the modern age where it is so easy to reach huge numbers of people in seconds with the correct exposure..

That is extremely paternalistic and pessimistic , not to mention deterministic in it's Outlook of human capability and how to right wrongs.

And now someone else has prominently retweeted the Protocols of Zion. This conspiracy theory is getting a lot of mainstream movement piggybacking on QAnon.

This is a reminder that conspiracy theories are not always harmless or humorous.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
And now someone else has prominently retweeted the Protocols of Zion. This conspiracy theory is getting a lot of mainstream movement piggybacking on QAnon.

This is a reminder that conspiracy theories are not always harmless or humorous.

Oh look at the time, it's protocols again.... I'll just wait until they bring up the whole well poisioning again...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berne_Trial

remember, this process is in a country that at the time, had not really a high opinion of jews. Tbf though at the time we were more concerned with stopping solving internal issues by stopping to demand revolution or counter revolution and actually were attempting to build up a wellfare state to a degree and propperly organise all political relevant entities into the government not to mention preparing for a certain waste of time but still.

they are nothing more then the convenient scapegoat doccuments , having been adapted by more radical exponents.

If you are able to read german, french or italian, then this will explain better what frontists are:
https://hls-dhs-dss.ch/de/articles/017405/2006-12-01/

Not Online!!! wrote:
That is extremely paternalistic and pessimistic , not to mention deterministic in it's Outlook of human capability and how to right wrongs.

Not to contradict myself, but I do agree with you. However, from experience (and this is not anecdotal, I've met hundreds upon hundreds of teachers at this point who agree) not everyone is capable of high level critical thinking it. It's fairly well reasoned that plenty of people are on the spectrum, it's also fairly evident many are undiagnosed, we have at least a few students a year that get diagnosed and I teach 16 years plus, they have gone through 16 years without a diagnosis.... Not to say being on the autistic spectrum can stop you from critically thinking, but it most certainly can be a barrier.

And unfortunately, some people are just not academically minded to decode complex theories and situations, especially those portrayed in the media that have multiple variables. Also, intelligence really is genuinely not fully understood, and the caveats of intelligence. Some people absolute will not be able to decipher and critically analyse and evaluate a subject, however them same people may be able to manipulate a football and place it on a pin head from 70 yards away on a consistent basis, no matter the weather. That evidences a high level of intelligence, including analytical skill... It just is not represented in the education system, and is not a skill that society desires so is not respected as much as it should be. The true challenge of the world is to harness human capability and make use of it, unfortunately academia is not the only route to do so, but is presented as the main route, and the alternatives are few and far between.

I should add, I have experience in the british education system and I am fully aware that this is not the standard necessarily across the globe... I want a Finnish education system if I could choose tbh.

I'd also add that some people get odd mental blocks regarding certain subjects. So whilst they might show skill regarding one subject, they appear unable to transfer that skill to another subject area that they've historically be "told" they are bad at.


I'd also agree that the education system in the UK has a terrible bias for promoting those who can do well in exams and who are good with generally abstract/theory/book learning. Meanwhile physical skills, hands skills and other areas of more practical application are often vastly under represented. I think its got better slowly, but there's still a body of students that I think would be better doing basic schooling and alongside an apprentice in a manual skill.

I could rant for years on end about the fallacy of exams, and also the ridiculous standard and barriers put up by the requirement of a GCSE of grade C/4 in maths... Functional skills is appropriate for many. Trigonometry, algebra etc has it's place, those places are few and far between though...

UK’s education system doesn’t seem to have really caught up with the digital world, and the perils contained there in.

Critical Thinking is of course essential for not taking information at face value.

Even the relatively simple “is this corroborated elsewhere?” question helps a lot.

Consider the “insider” often quoted in sensationalist stories. I’ll use Solo as a bipartisan example. Yes, it was known and widely reported to have been a difficult child. But the tales of “on-site dialogue coaches” and serious behind the screen issues? All came from a single, uncorroborated source, who was of course anonymous.

Clearly, it had some grain of truth (difficult child), but the rest? It seems likely to have just been click bait nonsense, dreamt up for the sensation and attention.

Qanon and the Protocols of Zion? I’m pretty sure Q started off as a genuine prank. Some wag seeing just how much online chaos vague statements and an unverified source could create.

Since then, it’s clearly been hijacked by persons with a clear agenda of anti-semitism, weaving centuries old and long debunked tales of bigotry into a very modern setting.

To people of a similar leaning, it’s not just the same old bigotry rearing it’s ugly head, but proof that said tales were true, are true, and unless “something are din abow tit”, will always be true.

What started as a joke from the outside looking in, and a pool of idiots to laugh at, is becoming deeply sinister, and worrying.

Critical Thinking is only part of the answer though. The appeal of these Conspiracy Theories runs very, very deep.

Please note folks I’ve again been careful to leave Politics out of it as far as I can. We’re discussing the Theory, not the politics and who they support.

I think we could probably generate a whole thread on the ills and issues of education systems and the curriculum!

endlesswaltz123 wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
That is extremely paternalistic and pessimistic , not to mention deterministic in it's Outlook of human capability and how to right wrongs.

Not to contradict myself, but I do agree with you. However, from experience (and this is not anecdotal, I've met hundreds upon hundreds of teachers at this point who agree) not everyone is capable of high level critical thinking it. It's fairly well reasoned that plenty of people are on the spectrum, it's also fairly evident many are undiagnosed, we have at least a few students a year that get diagnosed and I teach 16 years plus, they have gone through 16 years without a diagnosis.... Not to say being on the autistic spectrum can stop you from critically thinking, but it most certainly can be a barrier.

Absolutely, however, critical thought for me, is not just decoding but also the question asked in counter to what is presented.

And unfortunately, some people are just not academically minded to decode complex theories and situations, especially those portrayed in the media that have multiple variables. Also, intelligence really is genuinely not fully understood, and the caveats of intelligence. Some people absolute will not be able to decipher and critically analyse and evaluate a subject, however them same people may be able to manipulate a football and place it on a pin head from 70 yards away on a consistent basis, no matter the weather. That evidences a high level of intelligence, including analytical skill... It just is not represented in the education system, and is not a skill that society desires so is not respected as much as it should be. The true challenge of the world is to harness human capability and make use of it, unfortunately academia is not the only route to do so, but is presented as the main route, and the alternatives are few and far between.

I should add, I have experience in the british education system and I am fully aware that this is not the standard necessarily across the globe... I want a Finnish education system if I could choose tbh.

See, and this is where i think we differ to what critically thinking means: For political decisions to happen on the basis of abstract and difficult to understand dogma and theory you don't need any university degree. The main reason i refuse your position simply is that i am keen on protecting my rights for halfdirect democratic systems. Which inherently rely upon a citizens understanding, and so far, that seems the case, even the most abstract concepts like "Vollgeld" can be voted on and explained propperly with time and skill.
Vice versa so are other economic initiatives. It turns out the average citizen is very well capable of finding a balanced opinion founded on a basis that is arguable debatable and strengthened by facts atleast over here.

OTOH Education was allways a core tenant of swiss kantons planning, regardless of nature of the respective Kantons in order to ideologically opose other Kantons influences. A reading population is one you can propagandistically work with, it's however also one that when there is no censorship can decide at any point that your attempt at that is nonsense and they search then out a quality paper instead.

As for intelligence, and i guess it also goes back into lawenforcement and punishment, the core tenents are imo that the question what is intelligence, beyond a moment of selfawareness (which is probably the smalles common denominator out there...) , is simply up for debate. We are now neurologically and psychologically at a point that is nothing more then the "leib-seele-problematik" that philosphy is biting it's teeth out since 3000 years. Psychology did run in this problem when psychiatric therapy failed on urge crime, neurology to describe the phenomenon of thought.

And as for societal value, or overvalueing of academia, or under valueing, i honestly think that also has to do with societal classes beeing attached to education and possibilities for education and having become nothing more in some cases , then a pawn in the game of politics.

It's also something that is really confusing for me to watch, basically you have to do x level of schooling to get x job, ignoring completley the reality that a wall builder ( Maurer) can just as easily and more correctly learn the practical skills of an ingenieur for statics out of personal experience and with a dual way of education should be able to reach the same position of education through his addmitedly diffrent set of intelligence / skills.
meanwhile when you hear french people talk : make the Lycée!
Even if that doesn't fit the students capability or set of inteligence or skills. It's a narrowmindedness i feel is extremely contraproductive.





Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Overread wrote:
I think we could probably generate a whole thread on the ills and issues of education systems and the curriculum!

by all means, it would lead at the very least , to interesting discussion and debatte on probably the most important thing a state has to provide and how people view it.

endlesswaltz123 wrote:


As a teacher, in Britain, and one that teaches science and specifically critical thinking... The reason why you don't learn it at younger ages, typically in state schools is because it requires a lot of higher order thinking, and also, you need to be able to utilise base principles and equations to validate any criticism of a concept... How can you utilise a counter argument if you cannot prove the base principles of the counter argument is correct?

Teaching all of those base principles is firstly time consuming, and requires numerous repetitions and practice of it, it takes all of your base school education to cover it.

Then, referring to higher order thinking, unfortunately some people are not capable of that.. This is why it is so important to not spread misinformation, especially in the modern age where it is so easy to reach huge numbers of people in seconds with the correct exposure..

I agree that the general subject area of critical thinking can become extremely complex but I would argue all subjects taught in school are the same. My first year studying chemistry at university was basically dedicated to explaining how all the stuff we were taught in high school was wrong. Not wrong because teachers are stupid, but wrong because school kids don't have the requirement or foundational knowledge required to be taught the reality so instead we were taught something close enough to understand the concepts and not provide completely erroneous answers in exams, which helped provide a foundation for university to teach from.

But when I talk about critical thinking I'm not talking about the nuances of philosophy, deduction and logical argument. I'm talking about the sort of simple principles that those things are built on. Like MDG points out, there are simple concepts like corroboration that aren't really discussed. Or the scientific method. When I was at school that was never properly explained and I'm still not sure whether that's because it was assumed knowledge or deemed irrelevant to passing exams (I suspect the latter). I think that's what leads to people so readily dismissing science later in life. They don't understand how the process works so they see it purely as some random person giving their opinion and equate that to some other random person on Facebook doing the same. If you don't know any better it's all just opinion, right?

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
UK’s education system doesn’t seem to have really caught up with the digital world, and the perils contained there in.

Critical Thinking is of course essential for not taking information at face value.

Even the relatively simple “is this corroborated elsewhere?” question helps a lot.

Consider the “insider” often quoted in sensationalist stories. I’ll use Solo as a bipartisan example. Yes, it was known and widely reported to have been a difficult child. But the tales of “on-site dialogue coaches” and serious behind the screen issues? All came from a single, uncorroborated source, who was of course anonymous.

Clearly, it had some grain of truth (difficult child), but the rest? It seems likely to have just been click bait nonsense, dreamt up for the sensation and attention.

Dare i ask what or who this Solo is?
Also, you should add to the corroborated, where is it from? who has paid for it?, With these two you can easily discern ALOT of what is written.

Qanon and the Protocols of Zion? I’m pretty sure Q started off as a genuine prank. Some wag seeing just how much online chaos vague statements and an unverified source could create.

Since then, it’s clearly been hijacked by persons with a clear agenda of anti-semitism, weaving centuries old and long debunked tales of bigotry into a very modern setting.

To people of a similar leaning, it’s not just the same old bigotry rearing it’s ugly head, but proof that said tales were true, are true, and unless “something are din abow tit”, will always be true.

Let's not kid ourself, intra societal interaction is pretty much, in many countries , dead. Classes living in closed communities, religious groups doing the same, all that leads to stagnation in understanding and debate. In many cases the Government is at fault at large, f.e. think of the rural and urban divide in politics and who get's voted into office, let's just say that Millieus exist for a reason, but how else are you expecting rural populations to vote f.e. in eastern germany, france, or the USA, when investments just simply don't happen, when infrastructure get's ignored, etc. When instead of actually paying attention to these portions of a country politicians just revert to killer arguments and what is colloquially dubbed the "Faschistenkeule" in discussion because the differing viewpoint has also attached diffrent values that seem unacceptable.

Same with migrants, how do you expect them to be able to integrate in a society when you cast them asside on a pile somewhere ? They aren't forced to interact with the local populus that way, why should they even bother to learn the language of said country, much less the culture?

What started as a joke from the outside looking in, and a pool of idiots to laugh at, is becoming deeply sinister, and worrying.

Critical Thinking is only part of the answer though. The appeal of these Conspiracy Theories runs very, very deep.

Please note folks I’ve again been careful to leave Politics out of it as far as I can. We’re discussing the Theory, not the politics and who they support.

Somewhere back in this thread, i mentioned it is like a religious cult often time attached to a personality cult aswell and the desire for people to have a stable place in a "society". I'd like to add to that, that the conditions for beeing caught in that rattrap skyrocket exponentially in regions that have lackluster perspectives and infrastructure.
Much less opportunity. Hopelessness afterall breeds the acceptance of a Messiah.

I'll leave this as my last post on the matter, unless we go down the rabbit hole in a separate thread, which I am more than happy to be a part of.

When I say academically minded, I don't necessarily mean intelligence in the form of knowledge, and applying knowledge, that is a factor, and I stand to reason that some people struggle with this factor, hence honesty and reducing all misinformation is key. However some of it is down to processing, or information processing. There are numerous theories on the cognitive function of the brain, and whilst flawed, the analogy or design is built on the brain being a computer. Most of us will know that computers come in different shapes, sizes, power and importantly for this argument, ability to process multiple tasks/actions at once. Many people do not attain an efficient processing ability. Now it's not that they are incapable of processing the arguments, it's how much time are they given to do so? Time is precious, not many people have vast amounts of time to dedicate to decoding a problem. It's also why exams in part are a fallacy, it is used as a measure of capability, when it is actually a measure of capability only within a time constraint. Give people enough time, they can find the right answer, so many people don't have the time to do so. Then when you inspect the difficulty of the task, is there the motivation to carry on chipping away, is the ram their to maintain one crucial counter point that invalidates the whole counter argument when taken down a specific avenue, there's just too many variables to juggle for some people to formulate the correct outcome.

And this isn't taking into account the impact of stress, positive and/or negative feedback and many other factors that go into the ability of a person to process information effectively.

BTW, this is my opinion, and I believe myself to be correct, I'm also not pig headed enough to suggest I definitely am correct on this matter though.

Slipspace wrote:

But when I talk about critical thinking I'm not talking about the nuances of philosophy, deduction and logical argument. I'm talking about the sort of simple principles that those things are built on. Like MDG points out, there are simple concepts like corroboration that aren't really discussed. Or the scientific method. When I was at school that was never properly explained and I'm still not sure whether that's because it was assumed knowledge or deemed irrelevant to passing exams (I suspect the latter). I think that's what leads to people so readily dismissing science later in life. They don't understand how the process works so they see it purely as some random person giving their opinion and equate that to some other random person on Facebook doing the same. If you don't know any better it's all just opinion, right?

If there is any reason for this phenomenon indeed beeing so widespread then yes, this will probably be it, now we just would need to test the hypothesis.

endlesswaltz123 wrote:
Also, intelligence really is genuinely not fully understood, and the caveats of intelligence. Some people absolute will not be able to decipher and critically analyse and evaluate a subject, however them same people may be able to manipulate a football and place it on a pin head from 70 yards away on a consistent basis, no matter the weather. That evidences a high level of intelligence, including analytical skill... It just is not represented in the education system, and is not a skill that society desires so is not respected as much as it should be.

I just wanted to go back and pick up on this one briefly... Personally I'd say it's one of the major tragedies of modern Britain that being good with a football seems to be vastly more valued and considered an aspirational goal than having a decent level of critical thought.

Crispy78 wrote:

endlesswaltz123 wrote:
Also, intelligence really is genuinely not fully understood, and the caveats of intelligence. Some people absolute will not be able to decipher and critically analyse and evaluate a subject, however them same people may be able to manipulate a football and place it on a pin head from 70 yards away on a consistent basis, no matter the weather. That evidences a high level of intelligence, including analytical skill... It just is not represented in the education system, and is not a skill that society desires so is not respected as much as it should be.

I just wanted to go back and pick up on this one briefly... Personally I'd say it's one of the major tragedies of modern Britain that being good with a football seems to be vastly more valued and considered an aspirational goal than having a decent level of critical thought.

I see why you say that, and personally, I find it infuriating that footballers are used and called 'role models'.... There's no common sense in modelling yourself on a footballer, even if you have the skill, talent and countless other factors, the likelihood of you making it is very slim.

Anyway, going back to your point, that was just one brief example I used, there are many many many others outside of sport that suggest a high level of cognitive ability without it being demonstrated in an academic area, yet we would call this people unintelligent? I argue against that.