The Dangers of Anti-Intellectual Propaganda

[zinfamous]

The infuriating thing for me is to watch scientifically illiterate politicians questioning scientists like there is still a debate about a scientific consensus. The politician is supposed to accept the scientific consensus and than make decisions based on that consensus. Increasingly politicians are failing in this duty.

When you have politicians that believe they have "a personal relationship with their savior" and that the proper way to do religion is to "have a personal relationship--ignoring all other theology," then you end up with this sort of thing. Evangelical types that believe "personal relationships" are the way to do business, policy, and life.

I find that many republicans are quite proud of their "personal relationship with truth" or "personal relationship with journalism" or "personal relationship with science." Anything you want can be true, you just have to want it to be that way and be sure to fondle it properly when it looks lonely.

 

[zinfamous]

Don't be obtuse.

Check out this post.

http://www.portvapes.co.uk/?id=Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps&exid=threads/we-have-met-the-enemy.2531070/page-3#post-39226673

This is not something that is questioned in science. Its well known that biology drives gender identity. Its not the only thing, but your statement is factually wrong.

Oh man--you went back to google guy and your ham-fisted application of reports that weren't all that clear to you? My word...

 

[Sonikku]

Why is anti-intellectualism dangerous? The first thing every single totalitarian or authoritarian regime in history has done, is round up the intellectuals and kill or imprison them.

It is for that reason that I stay in the P and N forums. It is my Trump bunker.

 

[realibrad]

Oh man--you went back to google guy and your ham-fisted application of reports that weren't all that clear to you? My word...

There is someone on this forum, in this thread that is educated on this subject.

@interchange

Would you mind giving your insight on the statement made by zinfamous?

Gender is a social construct, not a biological one.

I said that his statement is incorrect and that there is an overwhelming mountain of data that says he is wrong. Gender is not only a social construct and biology has a heavy influence on people and their gender identity.

 

[interchange]

I said that his statement is incorrect and that there is an overwhelming mountain of data that says he is wrong. Gender is not only a social construct and biology has a heavy influence on people and their gender identity.

Nature vs nurture is dumb. It's obviously both any time any debate about it comes up.

The better question is, why does it even matter?

 

[mect]

I think living by what you think an invisible friend in the sky wants is no way to go about life... but, that's what works for me, for others believing in that stuff and swearing it is real is what works for them. That's all fine, but if they asked me to pray or live by their gods rules, I'm not playing along. I don't go to their church, I don't worry about what their god says. Likewise, when a guy with a 10" schlong and an X and Y chromosome in every single cell of his body insists I call him a her, I'm not playing along.

And someone with XXY? X0? XXXY? XY/XXY? XYY?

And so if a Christian wants to be referred to as a Christian, you won't do that? You won't call a Muslim a Muslim? It is too much of an inconvenience for you to simply address a person by the gender they identify as? You're okay contributing to depression, mental illness, and suicide in individuals simply because its too much of a bother for you to accommodate these individuals with a word. Even if a person looks and acts feminine, poses as a woman, and you've always thought was a woman, as soon as you discover she has a dick you're going start calling her him? No one is asking you to be transgender. People are only asking that you treat transgenders as normal people.

 

[kage69]

If we're not careful, we're going to have all the Trump supporters turning up here for an "I'm Spartacus!" moment.

That might be a little too glorious a reference for this crowd. Fraternal honor, solidarity, sacrifice?

More like, "I'm Brian! And so is my wife!"

 

[Moonbeam]

This is wrong. All of the research agrees that biology is a massive contributor to gender identity. You just gave a perfect example of how anti-science ideas can spread.

All you just did was equate the fact that for most people the sex they were born as winds up being the sex they identify with. What you have failed to do is identify why that happens. You are saying, for example, that being born a boy is what makes boys identify as boys as a genetic cause and effect when it could as easily be that the self awareness that one was born a boy drives most boys to identify as boys, but in fact not all of them. You are making a rational argument that persuades you but it does not persuade me because you lack a critical ability to be analytical and visualize the problem in a holistic context. You have your nose to close to the trees to see the forest. This may be a matter of biology but not the biology of gender. It may be a matter of the hormones present in the fetal environment.

 

[realibrad]

Nature vs nurture is dumb. It's obviously both any time any debate about it comes up.

The better question is, why does it even matter?

Because the modern discussion is that gender and gender identity is only a construct of the society and that is wrong. Spreading this misinformation only servers to make a complex topic even more confusing. When this wrong idea gets built into society as fact then it causes people to lose their connection with reality and how their mind works. Its one thing if people are ignorant about a topic, but its another issue when people believe wrong ideas and build more ideas atop. Its a key reason we have so many depressed people in society. But society's standards people can have everything and still be deeply depressed. It comes as a shock when these people lash out because too often people have lost touch with reality and what influences them.

Plus, it was a super dumb thing to say. He is a learned person that by almost all metrics is smarter than I will ever be, and so it annoys me to see that be wasted.

*Also thank you for responding. I felt it was more or less putting you in the middle as a tool for my argument, but, I do respect your opinion on this as well as believing that you are far more educated about this topic.

 

[realibrad]

All you just did was equate the fact that for most people the sex they were born as winds up being the sex they identify with. What you have failed to do is identify why that happens. You are saying, for example, that being born a boy is what makes boys identify as boys as a genetic cause and effect when it could as easily be that the self awareness that one was born a boy drives most boys to identify as boys, but in fact not all of them. You are making a rational argument that persuades you but it does not persuade me because you lack a critical ability to be analytical and visualize the problem in a holistic context. You have your nose to close to the trees to see the forest. This may be a matter of biology but not the biology of gender. It may be a matter of the hormones present in the fetal environment.

No. What I am saying is that to flat out believe that gender is only a social construct is wrong. As interchange already stated, its both. There is lots of evidence to show that biology and how the brain is constructed influences how people identify far beyond how society influences them. Its also true that its not only about biology. If you are saying that I believe a child born as a boy identifies as a boy because he was born with a penis you are wrong. Gender identity is not nearly as simple as that.

 

[mect]

Because the modern discussion is that gender and gender identity is only a construct of the society and that is wrong. Spreading this misinformation only servers to make a complex topic even more confusing. When this wrong idea gets built into society as fact then it causes people to lose their connection with reality and how their mind works. Its one thing if people are ignorant about a topic, but its another issue when people believe wrong ideas and build more ideas atop. Its a key reason we have so many depressed people in society. But society's standards people can have everything and still be deeply depressed. It comes as a shock when these people lash out because too often people have lost touch with reality and what influences them.

Plus, it was a super dumb thing to say. He is a learned person that by almost all metrics is smarter than I will ever be, and so it annoys me to see that be wasted.

*Also thank you for responding. I felt it was more or less putting you in the middle as a tool for my argument, but, I do respect your opinion on this as well as believing that you are far more educated about this topic.

I think this is a valid point. Here's a good article on it by the LA Times.
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-soh-trans-feminism-anti-science-20170210-story.html

 

[jackstar7]

Glad to see you admit its a valid example. Kudos!

I guess I spoke too soon.

Pity.

 

[SlowSpyder]

And someone with XXY? X0? XXXY? XY/XXY? XYY?

And so if a Christian wants to be referred to as a Christian, you won't do that? You won't call a Muslim a Muslim? It is too much of an inconvenience for you to simply address a person by the gender they identify as? You're okay contributing to depression, mental illness, and suicide in individuals simply because its too much of a bother for you to accommodate these individuals with a word. Even if a person looks and acts feminine, poses as a woman, and you've always thought was a woman, as soon as you discover she has a dick you're going start calling her him? No one is asking you to be transgender. People are only asking that you treat transgenders as normal people.

Someone with a genetic condition isn't the type of person I'm speaking of, things can certainly be blurred in that situation.

I'll call a Christian a Christian. I'll call a man a man. I won't buy into any of their odd BS beliefs, though. Again, I don't want to change someone or tell them how to live their lives, if a man wants to pretend he's a woman, that's his prerogative.

Do you than Rachel Dolezal is an African American if that's what she identifies with? Genetics matter or don't matter in that case? Should a male that identifies as a female be able to compete in female sports?

 

[realibrad]

I guess I spoke too soon.

Pity.

Care to put forward something worth while, or did you just come in to shit post and talk to me?

 

[Amused]

The Left's strategy for decades is to convince the masses that social and political activism are the cornerstones of "intellectuals" and not that pesky math and science stuff. If you don't renounce religion, then you are doubly dumb because people are trained to think that religion and science are mutually exclusive. I doubt anyone will disagree that the education system in the US is generally run and managed by the Left yet we are losing ground everyday in educating our youth. The institutions of "higher learning" are importing foreign students in order to pay for the Elizabeth Warren types that have infiltrated those schools and are leeches sucking the system dry.

The cornerstone of the Left is to blame everyone else for their problems. Minorities and illegal aliens fail because of them racist white people. LGBT people fail because of the religious nuts. Women fail because of those sexist men. Poor people fail because of them rich folks. Democrats fail because of them gerrymandering GOP folks. X fails because of Y.... blah blah.

Yes, because how DARE those intellectual elites think for themselves! How DARE they question your beliefs and mythology!!! How DARE they think outside what you consider "normal."

How DARE they seek progress and enlightenment!!!

How DARE they expose your constant projections of your own faults and biases onto others!

How DARE they point out your consistent use of logical fallacies!!!

You know what's ironic?

Irony.

You know where the irony in the thread is?

Your post.

 

[mect]

Someone with a genetic condition isn't the type of person I'm speaking of, things can certainly be blurred in that situation.

I'll call a Christian a Christian. I'll call a man a man. I won't buy into any of their odd BS beliefs, though. Again, I don't want to change someone or tell them how to live their lives, if a man wants to pretend he's a woman, that's his prerogative.

Do you than Rachel Dolezal is an African American if that's what she identifies with? Genetics matter or don't matter in that case? Should a male that identifies as a female be able to compete in female sports?

If Rachel Dolezal wants to identify as an African American, I have no problem with that. I do agree with drawing the line when it comes to obtaining special benefits allocated to these populations. No, a transgender female shouldn't be allowed to compete in female sports. A transgender male should be allowed to compete in male sports. A transgender female should be allowed to compete in male sports. Those are things that affect others. I'm fine with transgender individuals using the bathroom of their choosing. I disagree with transgender individuals using showering facilities of their choosing unless there are privacy stalls. These cases are significantly different though than simply using the pronoun of choice for an individual and treating that individual with respect and dignity. And most importantly, acknowledging that transgenders have real views on their gender and aren't just looking for attention.

Edit:
I do agree there is a group of "intellectuals" on the left that attack science in the name of equality and agree that this is a problem. However, my impression is that is a much smaller group that is heavily denounced by both the left and right. See what happened to Bret Weinstein for an example.

 

[Amused]

I love how I post about anti-intellectualism and some people come into my thread and give us great examples of it in action.

Right up there with flat earthers.

 

[Moonbeam]

realibrad,: No. What I am saying is that to flat out believe that gender is only a social construct is wrong.

M: What does this even mean? Gender is assigned at birth in most cases based on the configuration of one's genitalia. What do you mean by a social construct. Please restate the 'social construct' argument you don't agree with.

r: As interchange already stated, its both.

M: Both what a social construct as opposed to I don't know what or nature and nurture, and if the latter how does that figure in?

r: There is lots of evidence to show that biology and how the brain is constructed influences how people identify far beyond how society influences them. Its also true that its not only about biology.

M: The argument you consistently make is that being born a male means you are born with innate abilities to do a better job as a Google engineer than women are born with faulting google for irrational unscientific thinking, when their thinking is not involved in anything but including women who can compete equally with men in these man favored areas in the workforce and to make them feel gender welcome there. Google wants a mix of gender among its engineers. You fault them as excluding rather than including because you blind yourself to the real issue.

r: If you are saying that I believe a child born as a boy identifies as a boy because he was born with a penis you are wrong.

M: I am not wrong in the majority of cases. I AM saying that being born with a penis in most cases means a person will make that identification where no ambivalence or internal doubt causes interference. I am saying that gender identification is a process of self selection probably based on biological reasons that have nothing to do with birth gender in cases where gender and identification are in conflict.

r: Gender identity is not nearly as simple as that.

That's my point. Let me make it this way:

Is it a social construct to fire an employee who interferes with a corporate decision to eliminate ideas presented on company media that promotes ideas that are inimical to promoting the comfort of employees who have been hired with the direct intention to promote gender equality because these women are actually just as good as however good Google is looking for as employees? You go right off the rails and suggest there are probably more talented male engineers than there are female engineers, the wrong argument, which is that for google the point is to have equal numbers of qualified engineers of each sex and that they don't need pin heads fucking up their aim by suggesting their approach isn't defies gender reality. A lot of companies have understood that a diverse workforce equates to greater profitability. This is because such a company can bring a broader perspective of experience to bear on a problem. Pin head thinking is a menace to navigation.

 

[1sikbITCH]

What are you advocating for then? What's the difference between a man that identifies as a woman vs. a Caucasian woman that identifies as a woman of African descent? In both cases the genetics say one thing, their "identity" says another. It is NOT intellectualism. It is group think in the raw, exactly what the left thinks they're fighting against.

What about a Caucasian man that identifies as a black woman?

I'm not the judge of anyone. I am not saying I don't think some folks are not freaks and weirdos because there are certainly plenty of freaks and weirdos and I imagine some would lump me into that category; but I recognize that opinions are like assholes and I give it no further thought. Not running anybody's life but my own and I appreciate the same courtesy from others. As long as you aren't infringing on another's civil liberties you can fuck all the goats you want while being a gay Chinese man dressed as a woman worshiping what god you choose. Have at it.

 

[Moonbeam]

Anti-intellectualism, as I see it, is based on a Pleistocene survival strategy that says, kill the stranger before he kills you. A society even back then would die out if such minds were to monopolize the tribe, because it would inbreed to the point of destroying itself by the accumulation and frequent expression of recessive fatal genes. The slow deliberate novelty seeking liberal brain was the one that learned to trade for raw materials not found locally and for new breeding material. Sometime the brain dead kill anything odd saved the day and sometimes it lead to the collapse of the group. Probably why we live in a mixed economy of diverse brains.

But, there will be no iPhones for a conservative anti-intellectual culture scared of its own shadow. And you can bet too, it won't prevail with stone implements against jet aircraft.

 

[ElFenix]

Tapatalk has an image for the preview of this thread that doesn't seem to be in this thread. I'm very confused.

 

[interchange]

I think living by what you think an invisible friend in the sky wants is no way to go about life... but, that's what works for me, for others believing in that stuff and swearing it is real is what works for them. That's all fine, but if they asked me to pray or live by their gods rules, I'm not playing along. I don't go to their church, I don't worry about what their god says. Likewise, when a guy with a 10" schlong and an X and Y chromosome in every single cell of his body insists I call him a her, I'm not playing along.

Do you refuse to call a person a Christian because you believe their god is bullshit?

 

[SlowSpyder]

Do you refuse to call a person a Christian because you believe their god is bullshit?

No, because there isn't any question as to whether the Christian is a believer or not, there's really nothing to debate about. I'll call a transgender a transgender too, there isn't any question about that. But, if a "woman" has (or had) a penis and the normal biological male XY chromosome set, then it is very debatable whether or not that person is a "she". I don't go for prayer at public school. I don't believe the Christians get to decide the abortion debate because of what they think their god wants. I don't believe someone can claim they identify with xyz and in fact be xyz because they want to. Feelings don't go before the science, right?

 

[SlowSpyder]

The intellectuals in CA put the feelings before the science in law now too.

 

[jackstar7]

Care to put forward something worth while, or did you just come in to shit post and talk to me?

I already did. You not noting or caring about it is on you.

I'm capable of many things, including shitting on your bothsides-ing and other garbage trolling.