Do we really want people to think for themselves or to simply believe what we are told.
Liberals usually claim an open mind is best and people should think for themselves. If people actually do that, then some will come to one conclusion while others will come to the opposite.
Is that really what liberals want?
Do liberals want half the people to believe one thing and the other half believing the opposite?
Conservatives are not known for asking people to think for themselves, but as of late it seems that anyone who thinks for himself is a conservative. Liberals mostly believe what mainstream news services tell them.
Is it time to stop thinking for ourselves?
@eladar saidLiberals most believe what mainstream news tells us?
Do we really want people to think for themselves or to simply believe what we are told.
Liberals usually claim an open mind is best and people should think for themselves. If people actually do that, then some will come to one conclusion while others will come to the opposite.
Is that really what liberals want?
Do liberals want half the people to believe one thing an ...[text shortened]... ostly believe what mainstream news services tell them.
Is it time to stop thinking for ourselves?
You mean like Dr. Fauci and the CDC and the WHO telling you to get vaccinated or cause a 4th wave in a pandemic? Because that’s reported on mainstream news.
Yet, you prefer to think for yourself? Because you and non-mainstream media know better than health experts and scientists?
Is that what you mean?
Or do you mean that the election was stolen? Because mainstream media reports it wasn’t? Well, because of recounts, court cases, etc. All the experts in the field (judges, etc. ) have concluded Biden won the election.
Exept non-mainstream media and you. You know better, because you think for yourself.
Is that what you mean?
Or Qanon? Because every rational person laughs at it and the mainstream media reports on the crazy folk falling for that claptrap… everyone knows it’s a load of rubbish. Except non-mainstream media and you. You know it better. You are sure that Tom Hanks is a child raping satanist wanting a liberal elite to rule the world whilst they eat children under pizza restaurants… because you think for yourself.
Is that what you mean?
26 Jul 21
@shavixmir
It is amazing how contagious this ultraright BS is, following the Italian model right down the line, except the US still has a chance to stop the toxin of lies if Joe Manchin
will relent about the stupid filabuster.
@shavixmir saidAs I said, closed minded. If people do not believe what you believe, they are wrong.
Liberals most believe what mainstream news tells us?
You mean like Dr. Fauci and the CDC and the WHO telling you to get vaccinated or cause a 4th wave in a pandemic? Because that’s reported on mainstream news.
Yet, you prefer to think for yourself? Because you and non-mainstream media know better than health experts and scientists?
Is that what you mean?
Or do you ...[text shortened]... they eat children under pizza restaurants… because you think for yourself.
Is that what you mean?
26 Jul 21
@sonhouse saidSonhouse, do you think it is more American for 60% of the senate to make law (the concept of NOT mob-rule), or do you think it is just fine for 51% to make such sweeping laws to affect our country?
@shavixmir
It is amazing how contagious this ultraright BS is, following the Italian model right down the line, except the US still has a chance to stop the toxin of lies if Joe Manchin
will relent about the stupid filabuster.
Hint: If one party is in the minority, then the other party TOTALLY runs the country by themselves. Should not there be a provision where the minority has a say.? If repubs were in control, I would still say 60%....a good ole down-home debate!! If Repubs were in control, would you then maybe want it to be 60%, so that there could be a debate?
I'm just asking Sonhouse, the sage of the Forum.
@eladar saidYou're using "think for yourself" to mean "believe whatever I want".
Do we really want people to think for themselves or to simply believe what we are told.
Liberals usually claim an open mind is best and people should think for themselves. If people actually do that, then some will come to one conclusion while others will come to the opposite.
Is that really what liberals want?
Do liberals want half the people to believe one thing an ...[text shortened]... ostly believe what mainstream news services tell them.
Is it time to stop thinking for ourselves?
In your view, "thinking for yourself" means if you want to believe in a flat earth, despite what "mainstream" media or scientists teach. Believing in a 6,000 year old earth, despite all scientific evidence to the contrary, are examples of what you consider "thinking for yourself".
Am I right so far?
You're conflating "think for yourself" with "believe whatever I want". That's the problem with your OP. Believing Trump's claims of election fraud, despite 59 courts dismissing such claims (including the overwhelmingly conservative Supreme Court) is an example of "believe what I want". It is not an example of thinking for yourself.
26 Jul 21
@shavixmir saidNo, he means like Dr. Fauci and the CDC lying to the public and people like you denying the reality of that. See my thread about "good misinformation". You deny facts rather than accepting them. It is habitual with you.
Liberals most believe what mainstream news tells us?
You mean like Dr. Fauci and the CDC and the WHO telling you to get vaccinated or cause a 4th wave in a pandemic? Because that’s reported on mainstream news.
Yet, you prefer to think for yourself? Because you and non-mainstream media know better than health experts and scientists?
Is that what you mean?
Or do you ...[text shortened]... they eat children under pizza restaurants… because you think for yourself.
Is that what you mean?
26 Jul 21
@vivify saidNo, that is what you are doing. You did it on my "good misinformation" thread. You think misinformation from Fauci is "good". Why?
You're using "think for yourself" to mean "believe whatever I want".
In your view, "thinking for yourself" means if you want to believe in a flat earth, despite what "mainstream" media or scientists teach. Believing in a 6,000 year old earth, despite all scientific evidence to the contrary, are examples of what you consider "thinking for yourself".
Am I right so far? ...[text shortened]... preme Court) is an example of "believe what I want". It is not an example of thinking for yourself.
@eladar saidThe "thinking" part is what makes the difference.
@vivify
You're using "think for yourself" to mean "believe whatever I want".
Tell me the difference between the two statements. A person believes something because this is what the thought process decides is most likely correct.
"Think for yourself" implies some work done to arrive at a conclusion, unlike most religious people (Hindu, Christian, Muslim, etc.) who "believe" because that's how they were raised.
If you believe Trump's election fraud claims because you exclusively watch conservative news, that's not thinking for yourself.
If you arrived at your conclusion after investigating multiple sources, fact-checking and doing research, that would be thinking for yourself.
26 Jul 21
@metal-brain saidAs I clearly said on your thread, there's no such thing as "good" misinformation.
No, that is what you are doing. You did it on my "good misinformation" thread. You think misinformation from Fauci is "good". Why?
26 Jul 21
@vivify saidSee, that is the problem with liberals. Their thinking is circular. Here is the liberal thought process when it comes to being open minded...
The "thinking" part is what makes the difference.
"Think for yourself" implies some work done to arrive at a conclusion, unlike most religious people (Hindu, Christian, Muslim, etc.) who "believe" because that's how they were raised to think.
If you believe Trump's election fraud claims because you exclusively watch conservative news, that's not thinking for yourself. ...[text shortened]... vestigating multiple sources, fact-checking and doing research, that would be thinking for yourself.
If you are actually open minded and you can think, then you will agree with me. Those who disagree with me are closed minded people who cannot think.
Thanks for helping to make my point vivify.
@eladar saidHow do you get this after I clearly said thinking for yourself includes researching a subject? How on earth do you interpret saying you should fact-check topics as "agree with me or you're wrong"?
See, that is the problem with liberals. Their thinking is circular. Here is the liberal thought process when it comes to being open minded...
If you are actually open minded and you can think, then you will agree with me. Those who disagree with me are closed minded people who cannot think.
Thanks for helping to make my point vivify.
Sh76 is clear proof against your claim. Even though we have opposing political beliefs, he actually does research on topics and makes intelligent, informed posts. Even if I disagree with him, I have to respect that.
People like you and Mott make no such effort in your posts. This is why conservatives like you, Mott, Dood, etc. never seem to be thinking for yourselves. You guys just copy and paste garbage from dubious sites like Breitbart or Newsmax.
26 Jul 21
@averagejoe1 saidWe've already lived through administrations that had good presidents that could barely get anything done because of obstructionist Republicans. Right now we're trying to get over having a bad Republican president who had no idea how to get things done. Get rid of the filibuster. It had racist roots when it stopped the Civil Rights Act for a generation, and it still has racist roots today when we see that PoC are being stripped of their constitutional right to vote. Get rid of the filibuster so that the one party in Washington that knows how to get good things done can get the minority out of its face and actually get something done for America.
Sonhouse, do you think it is more American for 60% of the senate to make law (the concept of NOT mob-rule), or do you think it is just fine for 51% to make such sweeping laws to affect our country?
Hint: If one party is in the minority, then the other party TOTALLY runs the country by themselves. Should not there be a provision where the minority has a say.? If r ...[text shortened]... it to be 60%, so that there could be a debate?
I'm just asking Sonhouse, the sage of the Forum.
26 Jul 21
@metal-brain saidStop reading Joseph Mercola on Facebook.
No, he means like Dr. Fauci and the CDC lying to the public and people like you denying the reality of that. See my thread about "good misinformation". You deny facts rather than accepting them. It is habitual with you.
He's not right. He's the biggest purveyor of misinformation on Facebook, and your posts here sound exactly like the BS he spews on Facebook.