Philosophy Now Forum

The Inglorious One wrote:The point is that the media's "fact checking" falls short and people naive enough to believe it is informative are philosophic idiots, thinking with their emotions rather than the rational mind.

Yes M, we have Fact Check in the US. The above response is the typical reaction to it from the right. They don't believe anything fact check say. They think it a liberal conspiracy. You have to live around Republican Americans to understand just how insane it has become, I am afraid.

artisticsolution wrote:

The Inglorious One wrote:The point is that the media's "fact checking" falls short and people naive enough to believe it is informative are philosophic idiots, thinking with their emotions rather than the rational mind.

Yes M, we have Fact Check in the US. The above response is the typical reaction to it from the right. They don't believe anything fact check say. They think it a liberal conspiracy. You have to live around Republican Americans to understand just how insane it has become, I am afraid.

Ah OK, AS, thanks for repeating that response - didn't pick up on that first time round.
I suppose some might not even think to look for evidence to support their emotion or tradition-based views. Personally, I dislike the labels that are attached to people and that people cling to so as to attack/defend: left/right - emotional/rational - traitor/patriot etc.
Full of fury and generalisations; black and white thinking. 'You are either with us, or against us' - it appals me.

I'm interested to discover any other 'FactCheck' systems and how they inform public and political debate.
Anyone know which is best for least bias?
Where do you go to - to check in/out your 'feelings'?

marjoram_blues wrote:

artisticsolution wrote:

The Inglorious One wrote:The point is that the media's "fact checking" falls short and people naive enough to believe it is informative are philosophic idiots, thinking with their emotions rather than the rational mind.

Yes M, we have Fact Check in the US. The above response is the typical reaction to it from the right. They don't believe anything fact check say. They think it a liberal conspiracy. You have to live around Republican Americans to understand just how insane it has become, I am afraid.

Ah OK, AS, thanks for repeating that response - didn't pick up on that first time round.
I suppose some might not even think to look for evidence to support their emotion or tradition-based views. Personally, I dislike the labels that are attached to people and that people cling to so as to attack/defend: left/right - emotional/rational - traitor/patriot etc.
Full of fury and generalisations; black and white thinking. 'You are either with us, or against us' - it appals me.

I'm interested to discover any other 'FactCheck' systems and how they inform public and political debate.
Anyone know which is best for least bias?

That's just the thing. I do too. How long have you known me? You know I am the first person to say I hate labels. However, If you live in a world of insanity (stupidity) eventually it wears you down. I mean...just take a look at Obama. Even the president of the united states has to joke about it to get be able to make it through. You simply have no idea what it's like day after day.

I would say half of my friends and family are Donald Trump crazy when it comes to politics. Meaning, they are on the Rush Limbaugh, Donald Trump, Ted Nugent band wagon. Not in a "I like them" sort of way...but in a "America will end as we know it if one of these people does not become president" type of way. Now, I have no problem if anyone wants to admire these people...that is their choice. But to go out of their way to say, "This is the most intelligent person I have ever met. I will believe them instead of the facts...not only that...I think they are qualified to be president." Well, it's just too insane/dishonest/stupid to take. And when it is done over and over even in the face of reason...it's just maddening. I am telling you I am bat shit crazy now....but at least I am not Donald Trump crazy....

http://www.factcheck.org/

http://www.politifact.com/

http://conservativefactcheck.com/ Just to be fair...

AS, I'm hearing you and have every sympathy.
So what can you do with crazy people who can't or won't reason? and when you yourself are losing the plot?
Does philosophy help?

marjoram_blues wrote:AS, I'm hearing you and have every sympathy.
So what can you do with crazy people who can't or won't reason? and when you yourself are losing the plot?
Does philosophy help?

I edited my post above to include some fact check sites....take a look at the conservative one and tell me what you think...lol

That's the epitome of it in a nutshell. over and over and over...and no...philosophy doesn't work because either they believe it's the devil's work and run from it like the plague, or they believe it is nonsense...or they are interested but they can't take that it challenges their beliefs...and that's when some of them become like bob the baptist and make up their own philosophy hoping one day they will be king (of the fools).

To be fair...once in a great while you meet an intelligent person like Tom (Tbeiter) who at least is rational...and can carry on a philosophical conversation...but I have only known 2 in my lifetime.

Thanks for the links, AS.

You are not alone in being concerned as to who the next president of the USA might be, let me tell you.
And I meant - in the face of total brick walls, what philosophy - if any - helps you deal with the 'madness' of it all ?

You know you are the best thing that ever happened to me on this forum, doncha ?
But don't tell anybody - they might get bat shit crazy jealous

OK, one of the best things

marjoram_blues wrote:Thanks for the links, AS.

You are not alone in being concerned as to who the next president of the USA might be, let me tell you.
And I meant - in the face of total brick walls, what philosophy - if any - helps you deal with the 'madness' of it all ?

You know you are the best thing that ever happened to me on this forum, doncha ?
But don't tell anybody - they might get bat shit crazy jealous

LOL...was heading out to do a mural but had to reply to this...

I'm the best thing that happened to you here!? Oh you poor poor dear...

Love ya too!

Philosophy has not helped much, with the madness, that is. It has helped a great deal to know more...which is all I ever crave. I think it has helped with my art...at least in so far it has broadened my horizons so to speak and made me see things clearly as far as not being fooled by what i think I see...it's difficult to explain the change in my aesthetics...it's sort of like this,

http://www.gfxnerds.com/blog/79-forced- ... -your-mind

Last link didn't work...this one is better...lol

It's a sad state of affairs when people cannot tell the difference between philosophy and political opinion.

AS. As a lifelong student of the US political scene as an outsider I always look forward to your presidential election years. You have a stellar record of trotting out candidates of vaudevillian absurdity who make your nation the laughing stock of the world, but no doubt keep the stock prices of your media companies trending upward. To an Aussie the US political scene has never been about public policy, either domestic or geo-political. America is all about SHOW BUSINESS.

Obvious Leo wrote:AS. As a lifelong student of the US political scene as an outsider I always look forward to your presidential election years. You have a stellar record of trotting out candidates of vaudevillian absurdity who make your nation the laughing stock of the world, but no doubt keep the stock prices of your media companies trending upward. To an Aussie the US political scene has never been about public policy, either domestic or geo-political. America is all about SHOW BUSINESS.

lol. So true. You would think that anyone who is the top dog in any country, especially one as big as the US, would have to be highly intelligent and savvy. Just look at the pscyopathic George junior. He was pretty well retarded. Reagan was senile--his wife used to feed him his lines. Ford couldn't think and walk at the same time. Are world 'leaders' getting stupider? I see it happening in my own country. Your own Tony Abbott seems to have had his brain drained and re-deposited in his ears.

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Your own Tony Abbott seems to have had his brain drained and re-deposited in his ears.

Tony is not the brightest penny ever minted but everybody's on to him. We don't like it when our pollies embarrass us on the international stage by making idiotic spectacles of themselves so Tony is on a highway to oblivion. However our system is vastly different from that which obtains in the US. We have our fair share of peacocks to strut the media stage but all the real decision-making is transacted by faceless men and women operating quietly in the background so what you see is not necessarily what you get. It's not a perfect system by any means but in terms of all the major performance indicators Australia consistently ranks right up with the best of them. The secret is to simply assume that all our politicians are thieves, liars and dickheads and thus when they behave accordingly we can congratulate ourselves on our excellent judgement.

Actually the most important feature of Australian political life is the fact that we still have a largely independent public broadcasting network. It is currently under threat once again but it has survived all attempts to emasculate it for almost 80 years.

Obvious Leo wrote:Actually the most important feature of Australian political life is the fact that we still have a largely independent public broadcasting network. It is currently under threat once again but it has survived all attempts to emasculate it for almost 80 years.

In what way is it "public", and what makes you think that makes it independent?

I used to think the BBC in the Uk was independent, by and large, but maturity and a life-time of travel made me realise that it is no such thing.
Currently it seem to spend most of its time trying to avoid coverage of the various anti-austerity events that are being staged all over the UK for the last 5 years.

Hobbes' Choice wrote: In what way is it "public", and what makes you think that makes it independent?

A question often asked, Hobbes. The ABC is public in the sense that it is publicly funded and allows no commercial advertising. It operates to a charter which guarantees its independence from political interference and its board members are supposed to be selected on the basis of their personal integrity and freedom from political bias. This last criterion is often a subject of hot debate but then so is the impartiality of the High Court. People who don't get their own way often complain about a stacked deck but since all of our political parties routinely complain about getting shafted by the ABC it seems to me they've got the balance around about right.

As I understand it the BBC relies heavily on commercial advertising for its funding. Since it is corporations and not governments which determine public policy this is hardly conducive to a balanced commentary on EU austerity measures.

Obvious Leo wrote:

Hobbes' Choice wrote: In what way is it "public", and what makes you think that makes it independent?

It operates to a charter which guarantees its independence from political interference and its board members are supposed to be selected on the basis of their personal integrity and freedom from political bias.

This is impossible.
The BBC claims exactly the same thing.

As I understand it the BBC relies heavily on commercial advertising for its funding.

Then you understand incorrectly.

Since it is corporations and not governments which determine public policy this is hardly conducive to a balanced commentary on EU austerity measures.

The EU has nothing to do with it.
DG's of the BBC, as with ABC have to be appointed by the funding /licensing body - that is the government. As there is no such thing as an unbiased government then there is no such fantasy as free from political bias - not such person exists, nor can they exist.