|
Authored by: ukjaybrat on Tuesday, March 05 2013 @ 09:36 AM EST |
good point. As PJ noted, i am fairly new here. I've heard of
FM before but i didn't quite realize the extent until last
night i went back and read some of his stuff... There was
indeed quite a bit of ludicrousness.
---
IANAL[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 09 2013 @ 02:03 AM EST |
"The point being: you might be curious at what's driving their decision to
make such obviously wrong claims... but that doesn't change the fact the
claims are wrong. No amount of understanding their position will alter the
reality the claims are wrong.
You might think of the examples outlined as being theoretical in nature. But
2 of the 3 examples really have occurred.
So while understanding the why may sometimes be important to examining
the truth of the claims, sometimes you don't need to know the why."
You always need to know the why of a dissenting opinion. Their claims
can't be passed off as wrong if you can't form an opinion on why the
dissenting opinions are wrong. If you don't read read their opinions, bc you
don't like the author, how do you know they are wrong?
Are you going to say a certain person's opinion is wrong on a particular
subject when you don't bother to read that person's opinion, even though
they write something you would agree with if you actually read what they
write.
They may agree with your opinion but you are saying they are wrong
because your previous bias, and to lazy or insecure to read other people's
opinions.
Wow I'm sad for the the collective future of the world after reading your
naive post.
Grow up.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|