Anti Intellectualism is Killing America
POSTED BY: Magonsdaughter
UPDATED: Monday, July 13, 2026 01:26
VIEWED: 26774
PAGE 8 of 21
Quote:I've explained this to you about a dozen times already ...
You seem to only be anti-violence when it comes to the US and Ukraine, not Russia - why is that?
Russia is not my country. I have no control over what THEY do, or what any other nation does. I DO ostensibly have some control over what MY nation does.
I'm fairly firmly of the belief that just as I shouldn't attempt to control what most other people do (I can only really control myself) and trying to do that will lead to all sorts of bad behavior on MY part, that USA shouldn't attempt to control what other nations do. Going down that path will lead to things like supporting terrorists and destroying a nation and killing millions just to destroy one person (whether that person is Saddam or Qaddafi ... or Putin) because you have the belief that you MUST, for some reason, stop that person. (Even if the cure is worse than the disease.)
Let me try explaining this way: If I'm a serial killer, for example, should I be outraged about what robbers are doing? Wouldn't that be a bit hypocritical? Shouldn't I control my own behavior FIRST, before I start bitching about everyone else?
So how about that the USA just stop invading people, stop supporting killers and terrorists (like Israel and Saudi Arabia) first?
AFA Kiev and "Novorossia" and which side I support: Yes, I know, ANY human killing is a tragedy, but that doesn't mean that ALL sides are equally guilty. One side has killed significantly more people than the other (that would be Kiev). Like I said: FIRST count the bodies and THEN figure out which side you're on, if any. And since the USA has killed more people than any other nation in the past 50 years or so, where does that leave me? Supporting the USA for sure, but not its military interventions and destabilizations.
--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
AND FINALLY
Quote:
Your insistence that you are right when society believes you to be wrong and choses another course, is in fact you creating an alternate reality for yourself. The fact that you continue to practice that reality daily shows others you remain unteachable.
Entire societies for centuries believed that the sun revolved around the earth. And then Galileo came along and said: No. The earth revolves around the sun.
Was he creating an "alternate reality" for himself? Or did he see the truth when it was society itself that was backwards? Should he have been "teachable" to society's "wisdom"?
Are we all supposed to stick our heads up our butts and defer to what "society" tells us, instead of using our brains?
--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:There are millions thinking they are the next Galileo without having done all of the hard work necessary. Life will disappoint these Galileo wannabes. From “The Alternative-Science Respectability Checklist”
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Entire societies for centuries believed that the sun revolved around the earth. And then Galileo came along and said: No. The earth revolves around the sun.
Was he creating an "alternate reality" for himself? Or did he see the truth when it was society itself that was backwards? Should he have been "teachable" to society's "wisdom"?
Quote:www.preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2007/06/19/the-alternative-science-r
There may have been a time, in the halcyon days of Archimedes or maybe even Galileo and Newton, when anyone with a can-do attitude and a passing interest in the fundamental mysteries could make an important contribution to our understanding of nature. Those days are long past. (And Galileo and Newton, let us note, understood the science of their time better than anybody.) We’ve learned a tremendous amount about how the universe works, most of which is “right” at least in some well-defined regime of applicability. If you haven’t mastered what we’ve already learned, you’re not going to be able to see beyond it.
espectability-checklist/
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I disagree. Anyone with an open mind can interpret data more logically. For example, Stephen Gould re-interpreted the process of evolution as "punctuated equilibrium". DNA has been reinterpreted as "the selfish gene". Human evolution has been interpreted as having a seaside period (and, I have to say, all the evidence so far agrees with that.)
The "big bang" theory can stand another look. If you REALLY want to make huge impact on society, how about coming up with a universal theory of human behavior? Yes, you need to know the underlying data, but in a lot of cases you really don't need to develop more data with megamilliondollar-colliders and such, in a lot of cases all of the data is there, all it needs is a better interpretation.
--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
So I have to support your idea of language reform otherwise I'm a conservative?
Yes. Or at least a Luddite. And its not language reform, its an English based international spelling system.
----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early
http://www.nooalf.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by THGRRI:No that was truly a mistake, good catch. I didn't say I had English mastered, far from it. I can't spell a lick.
Join the club, wich iz everybody.
It makes sense that a side effect uv English spelling iz degraded attention to detail, sins reading it requirez you to ignore haf the letterz.
----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early
http://www.nooalf.com
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Really bad example to make your point.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
I disagree. Anyone with an open mind can interpret data more logically. For example, Stephen Gould re-interpreted the process of evolution as "punctuated equilibrium". DNA has been reinterpreted as "the selfish gene".
Gould was not just anybody. He was not an outsider. He had always been in the thick of battle with his 479 peer-reviewed papers, 22 books, 300 essays, and 101 "major" book reviews. For the unpublished or not peer-reviewed outsiders who have strong opinions, none ever chooses to describe themselves as a crackpot. If you ask them, they’ll always explain that they are on the side of Galileo; and if you don’t agree with their ideas, you’re no better than the Inquisition.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
SIG
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Entire societies for centuries believed that the sun revolved around the earth. And then Galileo came along and said: No. The earth revolves around the sun.
Galileo was a giant. Sad you cannot distinguish between JO753 and Galileo. This quote from you does however shine a bright light on the level of your intellect.
It is I who has taken the side of the intellectuals and it is you who are rejecting them; read on.
SIG
Quote:
Was he creating an "alternate reality" for himself? Or did he see the truth when it was society itself that was backwards? Should he have been "teachable" to society's "wisdom"?
Because he believes we should all spell the way we text, (abbreviations and slang) his reality is void of the science of language. Nobody is claiming English is perfect, but he ignores it evolved the way it did through necessity and was sculpted by academics. This is why it is what it is today. People have looked at Nooalf, an abbreviation for (new alphabet), and the premise on which it is based. They rejected it, so yes this makes him unteachable.
It is only with the emergence of texting that it serves a limited purpose. Because of its use of abbreviations and slang, it is the limited to this usefulness.
SIG
Quote:
That statement, THUGR, reveals that you are fundamentally anti-intellectual, and furthermore, it reveals THIS SOCIETY as being the fundamental source of anti-intellectualism. We're all supposed to stick our heads up our butts and defer to what "society" tells us, instead of using our brains.
What this shows is you arguing against yourself when it comes to anti-intellectualism in the same thread. It also gives credence to my point earlier that people who like to address the topic of anti-intellectualism, are usually confused by the subject themselves.
You even argue against yourself when posting with G on a different subject in this thread. You suggest G doesn’t have a heart because he is selective in who he will criticize when people are being killed. Yet once again you refuse to confront Russia for its atrocities stating, what they do is none of your business.
SIG to G
Quote:
Your reaction to America's history of invasions etc make it pretty clear that you don't mind if we (or our allies) kill people, even millions of people. "America" thrived by committing a continuous act of genocide, slavery, sexism, and imperialism. All those killed ... it just doesn't mean that much to you. If it did, you would object to it.
And this next quote from you shows you are willing to confront foreign nations when convenient.
SIG
Quote:
I could point out Hitler, who used the German feelings of despair and uncertainty during the Weimar years to wrap the people around him
wisdom of the rough-hewn farmer/frontiersman" being better than the corrupt, dandified, static intellectuals of Europe.
And the contradiction when explaining to G why you do not criticize Russia.
SIG
Quote:
Russia is not my country. I have no control over what THEY do, or what any other nation does.
So that line about Russia not being any of your business is bullshit. Yep SIG as you say to G, "it just doesn’t matter to you, if it did you would object." You are so full of it. Thanks for the laugh and more importantly, more evidence you’re nuts and bias. Now back to the subject at hand.
English is the compiled work of scholars. It is the official language of 60 sovereign countries and has evolved over the last fourteen hundred years. It has done so by using the science of linguistics, the study of the structure and form of words in language or a language, including inflection, derivation, and the formation of compounds. It is a way of communicating structured by academics and despite where you are from, one size fits all.
You are suggesting I am anti-intellectual for pointing out to someone with no background in Language
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by JO753:Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
So I have to support your idea of language reform otherwise I'm a conservative?
Yes. Or at least a Luddite. And its not language reform, its an English based international spelling system.
OMG YOU ARE RIGHT WHAT AM I DOING USING TECHNOLOGY COMMUNICATING WITH PEOPLE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE WORLD? I'M OFF TO SMASH THIS COMPUTER!!!!!
Seriously, Jo, this is a hint. If you are trying to sell your idea of an international spelling system, how about you don't resort to insults when someone doesn't come on board straight away. I've read your stuff, I responded to you with decency even if I've disagreed. How about not resorting to ad hominems in your quest. You'll catch more bees with nector than a trap. JUST NOT SPELLING BEES. LOL
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:Quote:
Originally posted by JO753:Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
So I have to support your idea of language reform otherwise I'm a conservative?
Yes. Or at least a Luddite. And its not language reform, its an English based international spelling system.
OMG YOU ARE RIGHT WHAT AM I DOING USING TECHNOLOGY COMMUNICATING WITH PEOPLE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE WORLD? I'M OFF TO SMASH THIS COMPUTER!!!!!
Seriously, Jo, this is a hint. If you are trying to sell your idea of an international spelling system, how about you don't resort to insults when someone doesn't come on board straight away. I've read your stuff, I responded to you with decency even if I've disagreed. How about not resorting to ad hominems in your quest. You'll catch more bees with nector than a trap. JUST NOT SPELLING BEES. LOL
Shame on you, you Luddite you.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME