h a l f b a k e r yIt's the thought that counts.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
This would be a big, glitzy,
red-carpet award ceremony. It's goal would be to award honours and cash to people who have participated in online discussions on one of a variety of contentious, entrenched topics (gun control, religion, the
Israel-Palestine conflict, abortion, whether tea should be made
by putting the milk in first or last, etc.) and, following reasoned argument, changed their mind on the topic in question. Obviously, most years the awards ceremony will be cancelled because they won't be able to find anyone but it'll be worth it for the times they do find someone.
Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
Annotation:
|
| |
No, wait, you've convinced me.
[+] |
|
| |
I'd like to see a contest to see how many times somebody
can get the man on the street to go back and forth on their
support of polar opposite ideas. "Do you support less
government spending?" Yes. "Do you support more funding
of any and all government programs that somebody says
will do good stuff?" Yes. "Do you support taxpayers having
more money to spend to better their lives as they see fit?
Yes. |
|
| |
The point of debates, in general, is not to sway
the participants. It is to sway the audience. At
least some of the audience of any given debate
should be interested but undecided, or minimally
swayed individuals who can be persuaded by a well
reasoned argument. |
|
| |
Obviously most disputants would love to sway
their opponent, and this, in theory should be
possible if one side is supported by overwhelming
evidence, and the other isn't, but reality
intervenes. |
|
| |
Propaganda does change minds, or it wouldn't be
used so often. It is effective. |
|
| |
If someone changed their mind, it's often due to
them finally caving to the influence of one side's
propaganda, not them having any virtuous real open
mind. |
|
| |
+ I change my mind all the time! It's the ability to
finally see the other side. It doesn't often happen at
higher levels, so this would be nice. |
|
| |
On some things (not everything) being debated, there actually is a
Right Answer. An example: during the 1500's there was debate
regarding whether or not the Earth was the Center of Creation (was it
stationary or did it move). This award would be useless with respect
to those Debates. |
|
| |
//This award would be useless with respect to those
Debates.// |
|
| |
You'd think. Yet there are still people out there who
argue the contrary. The could be said with regard to
Young Earth Creationists today, and yet they still
exist in absurdly large numbers. As I said, just
because one side is right doesn't guarantee sanity on
the other. |
|
| |
What a great idea ! No, wait ... |
|
| |
Another common propaganda tactic is to take some
fact you don't like, (for example: 2+2=4), and then
pay someone with a title to say, "2+2=5". |
|
| |
See, when it's not possible to really convince many
people of your side, you just need to make the truth
"debatable". Then, you paralyze action for those on
the fence. |
|
| |
So, if someone actually is "open minded" & decides
2+2=5 after all, they get an award here? |
|
| |
Listen ya'll, it's very hard being right all the time. You
lose so many friends and spend countless nights
alone, on the sofa, with your kitty, being right. It's a
tough life, but one I've grown used to. Gray areas
don't exist in my life, because, quite frankly, I'm
always right. (EXCEPT WHEN I'M SITTING ON THE
LEFT) Hahahahahaha, had you all didn't I? |
|
| |
You're fighting biology here. You've heard of the
200% better product being required to overcome
buying preference? Here you are fighting the same
principles that v drive speciation. You need to
demonstrate real survival advantage |
|
| |
I liked this idea when I saw the title. I read all the
annotations explaining clearly why the idea wouldn't
function in real life but I'm sticking with my original
assessment no matter what. [+] |
|
| |
// If someone changed their mind, it's often due to them finally caving to the influence of one side's propaganda, not them having any virtuous real open mind.// |
|
| |
//See, when it's not possible to really convince many people of your side, you just need to make the truth "debatable". Then, you paralyze action for those on the fence.// |
|
| |
See the trick is to know when you don't know, and then you don't really have any sides.
...but then, what do I know? |
|
| |
[+] If you never change your mind, you're not using it properly. |
|
| |
Nobody should be afraid of being wrong. |
|
| |
... except a pilot on final approach, |
|
| |
Hehe, he makes a valid point. |
|
| |
I would agree that no one should be afraid of being
wrong, but they should be afraid of, or at least
embarrassed by, continuing in error when it is
pointed out to them. |
|
| |
Your pilot will make errors on approach. That's why
they start with instructor pilots, and have various
instruments to show them what's right. |
|
| |
It could be called the Flip Flopper award. Slomo video of flopping fish could be shown. Aspersions could be cast. Sometimes recipients of the award might get a wedgie on stage or otherwise be roughed up by the square jawed and certain host and hostess, to demonstrate the virtues of certainty over fishy flipfloppedness. |
|
| |
// Your pilot will make errors on approach // |
|
| |
Feel the fear and do it anyway ... errr, actually, you have no choice.
Sooner or later, the aircraft and the ground will come in contact - how
it happens is up to you, |
|
| |
ALL pilots make errors all the time. The test is how the pilot
recognises and recovers from them. |
|
| |
How long does a pilot have to entrench an opinion
on final approach? |
|
| |
Seconds rather than minutes, |
|
| |
1 Nm out and 300' above the threshold, in a puddle jumper you have
less than 60 seconds to get up close and personal with the Deity of
your choice. In a large civil aircraft, about half that, depending on the
headwind and how much you trust P2 to step up if you call "you have
control". |
|
| |
On aircraft carriers, well ... you don't want to know. 200kts+ to a dead
stop in 10 metres, if you get it right, |
|
| |
If you get it wrong, don't worry, You won't worry about anything ever
again. |
|
| |