The Gold had/still has me puzzled but it was in there so I left it - the point was to compare Banking to Bitcoin but whatever.
Yeah I call this the kitchen-sink argument style, where peopleâs reaction to some argument being countered is just to drop that and pick some other argument with the same conclusion. You know, like the Earth isnât actually warming, thatâs a hoax, but if it is then itâs just natural climate variation, not anthropogenic, but actually if humans are causing it then itâs not going to be a big deal, but if it is going to be a big deal then itâs GOOD, actually, our crops will grow better or whatever, and if itâs going to be bad then we canât do anything about it, but if we can then OK maybe we COULD have, but itâs too late now. You can tell when people argue like this that youâre not seeing the actual motivation behind their opinion, which in the case of global warming is typically a worldview which says that coordinated government action is bad.
zikzak pointed this style of argument out for crypto earlier:
Everyone does this to some extent, but itâs good to recognise when you are doing it because then you can at least realise that youâre approaching the subject with a bias.
2 Likes
Itâs basically variations of these:
So is nearly everyone here
They basically see crypto as having the same utility as rolling coal. Itâs not hypocritical so much as itâs wrong, if it is wrong. People make money off rolling coal, too
But Iâm with you on itâs hypocritical if theyâre not also saying you shouldnât fly for leisure or whatever. Which they arenât, because they do it. So I donât know what Iâm saying I guess it is hypocritical
I have defeated myself
1 Like
Think of how much more energy crypto uses just by all the posting in this thread.
2 Likes
Not only will they not do this, theyâll still claim that it requires tons of energy just like they continue to claim that the vast majority of transactions are for iLLeGaL AcTiViTy.
Do not tell me to post less
I will not post less
I will never post less
2 Likes
Wow, I didnât know it was such a high percentage.
Sorry bud, the law is the law
Itâs different to the Gish Gallop in that the point there is to overwhelm people with a firehose of arguments, with what Iâm talking about the arguments are taken one at a time. Iâm really just talking about bad-faith argument, but a particular subgenre of it. And the problem with âbad-faith argumentâ is that it generally implies that people are doing it deliberately, whereas the sort of people who deploy the global warming arguments I mentioned are all totally convinced that they are coming from a place of pure rationality.
Literally everyone in the entire world
Iâm curious about this.
Which of these more closely describes you?
- Capitalist
- Socialist
- Other/Not sure
0 voters
Your overall impression of capitalism is
- Positive
- Negative
- Bastard
0 voters
Capitalist more closely describes Bernie than socialist
1 Like
Thatâs overstating the case I think. Some people who engage in bad faith argument are knowingly playing games, as ably described by Sartre:
Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.
Those type of people see arguments in terms of a struggle for dominance, and for them logical argument is a game played to establish that dominance. But itâs true that for the subset of people for whom rationality is part of their identity, they always think theyâre being rational in argument.
I chose capitalist and negative, heh. Same as I would say Iâm a supporter of democracy and also my impression of democracy is negative.
2 Likes
Before anyone says this is a no true scotsman take, or ânobody is as eXtReMe as meâ take, itâs just a vocabulary take
If socialism doesnât HAVE to mean workers owning the means of production, then you need to come up with some other word to replace what socialism originally meant⌠the workers owning the means of production
A big part of the political ideology game is the battle for the definition itself.
Crypto is cool and it will solve world hunger.
1 Like
Bernieâs movement definitely has aspects that move the Overton window to the right, and other elements that move it to the left. Not really sure the net is as far left as people think.
Like yeah a lot of people become âactualâ socialists after being introduced to his brand of social democracy that he brands as socialism. But a lot of other people now think social democracy is socialism.
1 Like