| Short answer: No. Long answer: Nope. |
 |
| I think so, or almost Almost because there are people better at everything than one person, but that person is better at things which most people will find unnecessary |
  |
| No person is better, more meaningfull or above any other and a reason for that it's that what you think is valuable now, in X years will be worthless If you ever feel like you don't have anything to learn from someone else or if you think you are better then them in everything then I can assure you that you're still being surpassed in humility even by those same people. Humility is a tricky thing because it doesn't work like other characteristics since you can't really evaluate yourself in regards to it... Humility can only be reliably evaluated by outsiders and if you try to evaluate your own then it will crumble in front of you. I mean you said it yourself MilkMonster said: "but still when i get toxic man am i so heartless" ... "but theres always breaks where i'm just heartless, uncaring and hateful" Whenever you try to subjugate your "superiority" onto others you immediately become the least humble person in the room because as long as no one else is also doing it,you are the asshole! I understand that you are probably trying to talk about skills and life experiences not characteristics but it works in both ways. You will never know every experience that someone else has had or will have and because of that you will never be able to be over them in everything. Since for you to be able to know it all about someone you would need to have that person's life, making you not better but the exact same |
  You may grow out of anime eventually... But until then you might as well enjoy it! |
It's tricky to answer your question because depending on how and what I say it it may be missinterpreted 1)Think of it this way, you have two rooms, one is full of criminals and the other is full of firefighters, activists, doctors and they are the most noble people around. Both rooms are gonna explode and you can only save one, wich one are gonna save? 2)What if instead there are ramdom people in the first room, would your answer change? 3)Now what if one of the random people from room one is your mother or someone else that you care a lot? 4)What if the first room is full of people that you care? 5)Now what if in the first room there are young adults while in the second there are olderly people? 6)Now what if in the second room there are midle age people? 7)Now what if in the first room there are rich people that never worked for it in their life wille in the second there are people that have been working for minimum wage their whole life just to survive? 8)Now what if the people from number 6 and number 7 are the same? 9)What if people from number 1 and number 5 are the same? Pehaps some answers contradictet themselvs when there were presented more information to you... My point is that nothing makes us worthy of chosing the value of a life or a person but yet we still do it. The reason for that is that we have emotions! If two colonies of ants start a war amoung each other there are no wright or wrong, there are no more valuable or less valuable ants, there is just whoever wins wins If you ask me personaly what you did I will have to answer no, and the reason why is because I have emotions. But if we evaluated that same question under no emotions the answer would be have to be yes because under no emotions all life shoud be equaly as valuable do you understand that? But what is the wright way to think? Is it when you let your emotions afect your answers and you contradict yourself or is it when you value the life of a child rapist as much as anyone elses? I believe there is no wright way of thinking so I ask you to respect my opinions as I will respect yours |
Lime_BearMay 3, 2022 7:10 AM
| You may grow out of anime eventually... But until then you might as well enjoy it! |
| Of course it's possible, with relative ease depending on what type of people we look at relative to you. There's some people you completely outclass but there's also people who undoubtedly outclass you. You can be better than someone in so many ways be it economically or philosophically and morally. Saying that all people are equal is some anime protagonist shit that doesn't apply to life at all. Humility is important as another user said above, but I'd also argue confidence and knowing what you can provide and have is also really important. Main character syndome is real, but so is putting others above you. For example I listen to trash rap, therefore I'm the pinnacle of degeneracy. |
| Signature removed. Please follow the signature rules, as defined in the Site & Forum Guidelines. |
MilkMonster said: This is a childish fantasy. The bitter truth is that competence and innate ability varies drastically between people, and it's absolutely the case thats some people just know less and are generally clueless compared to others. And that there aren't things that the clueless person sees that the smart person doesn't see. More realistically, the clueless person just doesn't see anything because their thought-processes is muddled, confused, slower, and worse in every aspect.But on the other hand theres things you can only see from your current perspective. So no matter how much someone is similar to another in every way and even a little bit better the lesser person still has things only he can see that the better person cannot see. Even worse, the clueless person might have wildly incorrect views and be incredibly confused and overwhelmed by things that the smart person will be able to understand intuitively without even trying. Like imagine the difference between a professional virologist who understands everything about COVID, pandemics in general, how vaccines function, how measures to lower the r-number are useful etc. and an uneducated housewife that feels overwhelmed by it all, gets her answer from facebook memes and eventually starts falling for various conspiracy theories. The virologist sees everything accurately. The housewife sees things, but none of them are real, so she might not be seeing anything. Some perspectives are just wrong. You say that everything is connected, yeah? If you believe that, then an obvious consequence of this is that if you get very basic things wrong, these mistakes will show up in other areas as well. And worse, they compound. The childish view is that we are all different and everyone has their own perspective and something to contribute. But that's wishful thinking. The realistic view is that some people are just hopelessly brainfucked, which renders their perspective completely worthless. |
| *lampoons inwardly* |
Railey2 said: lol, if you mean people like Christian Drosten: they already failed with the Swine Flu, they are now failing again with the Bat Flu Like imagine the difference between a professional virologist who understands everything about COVID, pandemics in general, how vaccines function, how measures to lower the r-number are useful etc. The more time passes, the more it comes out that what has been dubbed as "conspiracy theory" has been true all along. Measures don't work. Masks don't work. The "vaccine" does not work, either. But yeah, have fun believing in the official narrative like the good citizen you are |
Noboru said: see, you are an example of the clueless person. Railey2 said: lol, if you mean people like Christian Drosten: they already failed with the Swine Flu, they are now failing again with the Bat Flu Like imagine the difference between a professional virologist who understands everything about COVID, pandemics in general, how vaccines function, how measures to lower the r-number are useful etc. The more time passes, the more it comes out that what has been dubbed as "conspiracy theory" has been true all along. Measures don't work. Masks don't work. The "vaccine" does not work, either. But yeah, have fun believing in the official narrative like the good citizen you are But the beauty is that the same people who don't even know the difference between RNA and DNA, the people think the pharma industry is evil and yet can't even name 3 different pharma companies or guess which the biggest ones are, the people who would fail a Statistic I course, etc. these people always think they know what's up. Example of a worthless perspective and a person that sees nothing. Lost in conspiracy-theory land. I hope you get better and recover from your obvious brainrot. Good luck. |
| *lampoons inwardly* |
Railey2 said: Nah, the irony is when you yourself as a clueless person call other people cluelessNoboru said: see, you are an example of the clueless person. lol, if you mean people like Christian Drosten: they already failed with the Swine Flu, they are now failing again with the Bat Flu The more time passes, the more it comes out that what has been dubbed as "conspiracy theory" has been true all along. Measures don't work. Masks don't work. The "vaccine" does not work, either. But yeah, have fun believing in the official narrative like the good citizen you are But the beauty is that the same people who don't even know the difference between RNA and DNA, the people think the pharma industry is evil and yet can't even name 3 different pharma companies or guess which the biggest ones are, the people who would fail a Statistic I course, etc. these people always think they know what's up. Example of a worthless perspective and a person that sees nothing. Lost in conspiracy-theory land. I hope you get better and recover from your obvious brainrot. Good luck. You do not need to know the difference to know that those gen therapies alter your DNA and are potentially toxic. And I hope, you will still be alive in as many years as the difference from this year to the year in which you joined with your account on this website. May God be with you. |
| Superior at what? School, career, cooking, reading, clipping toe nails, having opinions, calling people names, being funny, driving cars, playing basketball? In modern society, there are so many things to do. Even in school, I wonder how well a law student can program in Python or speak French. Most people aren't going to share themselves with you, especially if you have the superiority mindset. It is easy to feel like the smartest person in the room if nobody is talking to you. You are going to have a bad time in the long run if you base your self-worth on being superior to others. |
Noboru said: Utterly delusional. If you knew anything about basic biology, you'd know that nothing about the vaccine is "gene therapy". mRNA can not affect mitochrondrial DNA, there's no way for it to do that, no mechanism that could explain such an interaction. To affect genes in a targeted manner you need something like CRISPR, which is a VERY different thing from yeeting some mRNA-molecules into a cell. Railey2 said: Nah, the irony is when you yourself as a clueless person call other people cluelesssee, you are an example of the clueless person. But the beauty is that the same people who don't even know the difference between RNA and DNA, the people think the pharma industry is evil and yet can't even name 3 different pharma companies or guess which the biggest ones are, the people who would fail a Statistic I course, etc. these people always think they know what's up. Example of a worthless perspective and a person that sees nothing. Lost in conspiracy-theory land. I hope you get better and recover from your obvious brainrot. Good luck. You do not need to know the difference to know that those gen therapies alter your DNA and are potentially toxic. And I hope, you will still be alive in as many years as you've joined with your account on this website. May God be with you. But you don't know that, because you don't know anything. Do you realise that you don't know anything beyond a few vague concepts like "Uuhu uhuhh gene editing uuhuehe manipulation uiuheuhe toxic uhu uhh uhuh " like that's all you got. That's all conspiracy theorists ever have. It's fucking pathetic. I understand the psychology behind falling for obvious crap like "the elites are killing everyone with vaccines omg population control" (makes you feel real special, like you're "in on it", while the sheeple are oblivious), so you often see insecure losers go real hard for conspiracy theories. Since it boosts their self-worth and makes them feel like they figured it all out. I understand how that works psychologically, but the one thing I will never understand is how that feels from the inside. Like.. surely you must notice on some level how much shit you're talking? You must be aware of how little you know? How you can't answer a single question once you leave the surface layer? Or are you so lacking in awareness that you don't even realise this, even when it's obvious to everyone else? The most offensive part is that the conspiracy theory itself doesn't even make sense. Nobody gains anything from millions dying. All that accomplishes is plunging the world into chaos, which is objectively terrible for everyone. So unless you believe in cartoonish villains that wouldn't feel out of place in a childrens book, who are only evil for the sake of being evil.. oh wait. You literally do. You believe in that, don't you. |
Railey2May 3, 2022 9:44 AM
| *lampoons inwardly* |
Railey2 said: You're free to believe what you wantThat's all conspiracy theorists ever have. It's fucking pathetic. I understand the psychology behind falling for obvious crap like that (makes you feel real special, like you're "in on it", while the sheeple are oblivious), so you often see insecure losers go real hard for conspiracy theories. It does not make me feel special. I'm just having another view than the official narrative. But defending the official narrative seems to give you an enormous ego pushLike.. surely you must notice on some level how much shit you're talking? You must be aware of how little you know? How you can't answer a single question once you leave the surface layer? Or are you so lacking in awareness that you don't even realise this, even when it's obvious to everyone else? All I see here is polemics. I'm not listening to people who do not have a holistic view on things and fail in the same manner with focusing on irrelevant details despite having no idea how things actually work. The germ theory is as overrated as the CO² theory |
Noboru said: what the fuck? How deep into this shit are you? Germ theory is overrated?The germ theory is as overrated as the CO² theory goddamn, you really must be one lost bottom-feeder. One day you will look back at your life and wonder where it all went wrong, and your long streak of arrogance, thinking that you know better than all the experts, all the time.. that will be a recurrent theme I'm sure. Once you understand that, you'll have a chance. But right now, you're lost. Until that day comes, talking to you is a waste of time. But I think you do make a good example for the point I was making in this thread, when I said that some people are just overwhelmed and lost. See, @MilkMonster this guy thinks that germ theory is "overrated". What do we make of that? Railey2 said: The realistic view is that some people are just hopelessly brainfucked, which renders their perspective completely worthless. @Noboru: Blocked. |
| *lampoons inwardly* |
Noboru said: Railey2 said: lol, if you mean people like Christian Drosten: they already failed with the Swine Flu, they are now failing again with the Bat Flu Like imagine the difference between a professional virologist who understands everything about COVID, pandemics in general, how vaccines function, how measures to lower the r-number are useful etc. The more time passes, the more it comes out that what has been dubbed as "conspiracy theory" has been true all along. Measures don't work. Masks don't work. The "vaccine" does not work, either. But yeah, have fun believing in the official narrative like the good citizen you are You should stop saying things like "masks don't work." I stood up for you guys because I hated the mandates and everything, but it is really doing a disservice at this point. They'll be putting these words in my mouth the next time I try to discuss this topic with somebody, which will hopefully be never as I feel I have said everything there is to be said. |
| Never consider yourself smarter and better in quality overall as a human as compared to another. Once you think like that, you are just being an asshole. A pianist is good at what they do, they may not know basic calculus and science in general, but they make beautiful sound that a doctor, for example, could not. An engineer is good at analyzing things, a structural engineer can analyze and optimize the structural members to achieve structural integrity, able to withstand the loads while being cost effective, but the aesthetic of form and space, and how the building should function with respect to the environment, sustainability issues, engineers have to let architects work on them since architects are the expert for that task. They have to respect each other Person A knows things, person B knows other things. Some knowledge maybe basic, but that does not guarantee that a person must know about it. Basic to someone else may not be basic to another. Its important to acknowledge this Here is the thing that bothers me: Sometimes I just confused of how CD users are so arrogant, knowing pieces of knowledge and intimidate others with what they know. This is just practical example of knowledge being misused to intimidate others. They talk like they are the expert and Ph.D of the topic they talk about. Each of us know pieces of knowledge and can do things what other don't know and can't do, and vice versa. Those kind of intimidations are a form of internet bullying, and should be stopped. Just like what my other thread said, "its all about respect" |
philtecturophyMay 3, 2022 10:28 AM
|
Railey2 said: Yes, because outside of little children and immune-suppressed ones, what makes people sick are mostly their own behaviors and their mindset what the fuck? How deep into this shit are you? Germ theory is overrated? Louis Pasteur, the father of the germ theory even admitted being wrong on his death bed: "'Bernard was right: the pathogen is nothing, the terrain is everything" Now I wouldn't go so far to say that the pathogen is nothing, but it's far too narrow-minded to focus overly on it, in especial when ignoring the four postulates by Robert Koch Hippocrates, the father of medicine said: "It is more important to know what sort of person has a disease than to know what sort of disease a person has." "Before you heal someone, ask him if he's willing to give up the things that make him sick." Paracelsus, the father of toxicology said: "The dose makes the poison" Railey2 said: Do as you wishBlocked. 149597871 said: No, masks don't work, either. If anything, you're doing yourself a disservice by believing that a thin veil of something would be needed for protecting yourself against something that isn't any big deal unless you are severely stressed or have an immune deficit. And even then, unless you are very old, you are more likely to die from any cause of the measures than from the virus. But I appreciate that you are at least not as impossibly lost as the poster above you, dear distance-to-the-sun person You should stop saying things like "masks don't work." I stood up for you guys because I hated the mandates and everything, but it is really doing a disservice at this point. They'll be putting these words in my mouth the next time I try to discuss this topic with somebody, which will hopefully be never as I feel I have said everything there is to be said. |
NoboruMay 3, 2022 2:31 PM
| Yes some people do have merits better than others. For example, a child rapist is better than Fauci. |
| Die like you did by the lake on Naboo. |
| All u need just watch kaiji n u will understand it about what i mean later |
 |
| Yes, I am the apex predator that stands above all life. |
 |
| Sure. Mister Rogers was a categorically better person than Jimmy Savile, for example. |
Take care of yourself |
| Unless you specify a certain field, its a nope. |
 |
| I think all my abilities are all above those of a five years old. So technically yes. Also don't underestimate how much people can be stupid sometimes. |
 |
| I'm pretty sure most of you guys are at least a bit better than this fucking resentful idiot : https://myanimelist.net/forum/?topicid=2013886 Or at least I hope so. |
 |
| Yeah, I'm pretty sure I'm better at everything than the average 3 year old, I would love for little Timmy to even attempt to do a 360 windmill dunk off a backboard, that's right he can't! Bro can't even go to the bathroom by himself lol. |
 |
Railey2 said: Man this "virologist" == all-knowing bullshit seriously makes me question your academic background.MilkMonster said: This is a childish fantasy. The bitter truth is that competence and innate ability varies drastically between people, and it's absolutely the case thats some people just know less and are generally clueless compared to others. And that there aren't things that the clueless person sees that the smart person doesn't see. More realistically, the clueless person just doesn't see anything because their thought-processes is muddled, confused, slower, and worse in every aspect.But on the other hand theres things you can only see from your current perspective. So no matter how much someone is similar to another in every way and even a little bit better the lesser person still has things only he can see that the better person cannot see. Even worse, the clueless person might have wildly incorrect views and be incredibly confused and overwhelmed by things that the smart person will be able to understand intuitively without even trying. Like imagine the difference between a professional virologist who understands everything about COVID, pandemics in general, how vaccines function, how measures to lower the r-number are useful etc. and an uneducated housewife that feels overwhelmed by it all, gets her answer from facebook memes and eventually starts falling for various conspiracy theories. The virologist sees everything accurately. The housewife sees things, but none of them are real, so she might not be seeing anything. Some perspectives are just wrong. You say that everything is connected, yeah? If you believe that, then an obvious consequence of this is that if you get very basic things wrong, these mistakes will show up in other areas as well. And worse, they compound. The childish view is that we are all different and everyone has their own perspective and something to contribute. But that's wishful thinking. The realistic view is that some people are just hopelessly brainfucked, which renders their perspective completely worthless. Do you have a PhD? Because I seriously question if you even have a Masters with these seemingly absurd ideas that "professionals" are somehow more than they actually are. I literally speak with PhD students on a daily basis and know many people who actually have PhDs for years now and there is nothing particularly unique other than the time required to slog through that many years of academic bureaucracy. That academic slog requires clear understanding to succeed however people who actually hold PhDs ALWAYS make MAJOR mistakes and sure as shit shouldn't be held up as pinnacles of representative of what is "true" but instead thoroughly vetted and scrutinised precisely due to the clear fact that these people are prone to error just like anyone but unlike just anyone they hold massive power and responsibility. I'm not denying an academic background compared to someone who doesn't can be an indicator of a difference in ability/general knowledgebase (which I can assure you I'm most likely 90% more informed in my field than you) however just because that is true doesn't mean it is healthy to hold people up to some far higher degree such as you seek to do for "virologists" than is actually deserved. If anything it's quite hilarious you focus in on "virologists" despite said "virologists" causing this entire shit show to happen in the first place due to a failure in threat analysis. I don't remember you here during January 2020 so perhaps that's why, must be nice to stay ignorant and delegate your cognitive functions to "experts" to tell you what took place lmao |
 |
Cneq said: , next thing you'll tell me is that germs aren't real and what's that about threat anysis? Oh right the virus escaped a lab for sure, because real life is a thriller and you're the main character.Railey2 said: Man this "virologist" == all-knowing bullshit seriously makes me question your academic background.This is a childish fantasy. The bitter truth is that competence and innate ability varies drastically between people, and it's absolutely the case thats some people just know less and are generally clueless compared to others. And that there aren't things that the clueless person sees that the smart person doesn't see. More realistically, the clueless person just doesn't see anything because their thought-processes is muddled, confused, slower, and worse in every aspect. Even worse, the clueless person might have wildly incorrect views and be incredibly confused and overwhelmed by things that the smart person will be able to understand intuitively without even trying. Like imagine the difference between a professional virologist who understands everything about COVID, pandemics in general, how vaccines function, how measures to lower the r-number are useful etc. and an uneducated housewife that feels overwhelmed by it all, gets her answer from facebook memes and eventually starts falling for various conspiracy theories. The virologist sees everything accurately. The housewife sees things, but none of them are real, so she might not be seeing anything. Some perspectives are just wrong. You say that everything is connected, yeah? If you believe that, then an obvious consequence of this is that if you get very basic things wrong, these mistakes will show up in other areas as well. And worse, they compound. The childish view is that we are all different and everyone has their own perspective and something to contribute. But that's wishful thinking. The realistic view is that some people are just hopelessly brainfucked, which renders their perspective completely worthless. Do you have a PhD? Because I seriously question if you even have a Masters with these seemingly absurd ideas that "professionals" are somehow more than they actually are. I literally speak with PhD students on a daily basis and know many people who actually have PhDs for years now and there is nothing particularly unique other than the time required to slog through that many years of academic bureaucracy. That academic slog requires clear understanding to succeed however people who actually hold PhDs ALWAYS make MAJOR mistakes and sure as shit shouldn't be held up as pinnacles of representative of what is "true" but instead thoroughly vetted and scrutinised precisely due to the clear fact that these people are prone to error just like anyone but unlike just anyone they hold massive power and responsibility. I'm not denying an academic background compared to someone who doesn't can be an indicator of a difference in ability/general knowledgebase (which I can assure you I'm most likely 90% more informed in my field than you) however just because that is true doesn't mean it is healthy to hold people up to some far higher degree such as you seek to do for "virologists" than is actually deserved. If anything it's quite hilarious you focus in on "virologists" despite said "virologists" causing this entire shit show to happen in the first place due to a failure in threat analysis. I don't remember you here during January 2020 so perhaps that's why, must be nice to stay ignorant and delegate your cognitive functions to "experts" to tell you what took place lmao I remember you, still got you tagged as hopeless. All this text and the one thing you're saying is "if you believe experts you're dumb". Yeah, I'm sure you'll be able to get a much better view of the situation by reading Facebook memes and schizoposts on MAL. Yeah, I think I'd rather listen to the people who actually studied this shit. Freaking conspiracy theorists, man. They just keep coming. |
| *lampoons inwardly* |
Railey2 said: Quite ironic to be labelled "hopeless" by someone who has such a hard time inferring meaning from text that you're only takeaway is coming up with two strawman statements about labs and "germs aren't real" and throwing out some super generalised term like "conspiracy theorist" based on nothing more than your own biases which cause you to slap stereotypes on anyone who disagrees with you.Cneq said: , next thing you'll tell me is that germs aren't real and what's that about threat anysis? Oh right the virus escaped a lab for sure, because real life is a thriller and you're the main character.Man this "virologist" == all-knowing bullshit seriously makes me question your academic background. Do you have a PhD? Because I seriously question if you even have a Masters with these seemingly absurd ideas that "professionals" are somehow more than they actually are. I literally speak with PhD students on a daily basis and know many people who actually have PhDs for years now and there is nothing particularly unique other than the time required to slog through that many years of academic bureaucracy. That academic slog requires clear understanding to succeed however people who actually hold PhDs ALWAYS make MAJOR mistakes and sure as shit shouldn't be held up as pinnacles of representative of what is "true" but instead thoroughly vetted and scrutinised precisely due to the clear fact that these people are prone to error just like anyone but unlike just anyone they hold massive power and responsibility. I'm not denying an academic background compared to someone who doesn't can be an indicator of a difference in ability/general knowledgebase (which I can assure you I'm most likely 90% more informed in my field than you) however just because that is true doesn't mean it is healthy to hold people up to some far higher degree such as you seek to do for "virologists" than is actually deserved. If anything it's quite hilarious you focus in on "virologists" despite said "virologists" causing this entire shit show to happen in the first place due to a failure in threat analysis. I don't remember you here during January 2020 so perhaps that's why, must be nice to stay ignorant and delegate your cognitive functions to "experts" to tell you what took place lmao I remember you, still got you tagged as hopeless. All this text and the one thing you're saying is "if you believe experts you're dumb". Yeah, I'm sure you'll be able to get a much better view of the situation by reading Facebook memes and schizoposts on MAL. Yeah, I think I'd rather listen to the people who actually studied this shit. Freaking conspiracy theorists, man. They just keep coming. Also yes, if you believe all experts WITHOUT question and believe them 100% purely on the fact they are "experts" you're a fucking idiot, no questions asked. I'd seriously like to know your academic background because there's no way you've been through academia and still are under this completely naive and uneducated misconception of what a "expert" actually is. Also by the fact you have no idea what I meant by "threat analysis" you basically confirmed you weren't following the virus during January 2020 and yet have the audacity to give uninformed opinions on "experts" despite being oblivious to the actual response to the virus from early January 2020 to late February/early march. |
|
Cneq said: I believe experts in areas that aren't my areas of expertise, yes. It's called not being an arrogant fuck who thinks they know better than the people who dedicated their professional careers to studying a complex subject.Railey2 said: Quite ironic to be labelled "hopeless" by someone who has such a hard time inferring meaning from text that you're only takeaway is coming up with two strawman statements about labs and "germs aren't real" and throwing out some super generalised term like "conspiracy theorist" based on nothing more than your own biases which cause you to slap stereotypes on anyone who disagrees with you., next thing you'll tell me is that germs aren't real and what's that about threat anysis? Oh right the virus escaped a lab for sure, because real life is a thriller and you're the main character. I remember you, still got you tagged as hopeless. All this text and the one thing you're saying is "if you believe experts you're dumb". Yeah, I'm sure you'll be able to get a much better view of the situation by reading Facebook memes and schizoposts on MAL. Yeah, I think I'd rather listen to the people who actually studied this shit. Freaking conspiracy theorists, man. They just keep coming. Also yes, if you believe all experts WITHOUT question and believe them 100% purely on the fact they are "experts" you're a fucking idiot, no questions asked. I'd seriously like to know your academic background because there's no way you've been through academia and still are under this completely naive and uneducated misconception of what a "expert" actually is. Also by the fact you have no idea what I meant by "threat analysis" you basically confirmed you weren't following the virus during January 2020 and yet have the audacity to give uninformed opinions on "experts" despite being oblivious to the actual response to the virus from early January 2020 to late February/early march. Reading a few articles doesn't suddenly make an area your area of expertise. If most experts disagree with you, you should probably take the hint. Or you know, join the crowd that "does their own research" but never seem to know anything and also believe that germs aren't really shit. |
| *lampoons inwardly* |
Railey2 said: Insane, so you actually just straight up admitted you believe experts 100% purely on the basis that they are "experts" and due to you not wanting to spend the thousands of hours required to cultivate a vast knowledge base you instead, like I said, delegate those cognitive functions to be performed by "experts" so that you can live in willingly ignorance and take everything they say as truth.Cneq said: I believe experts in areas that aren't my areas of expertise, yes. It's called not being an arrogant fuck who thinks they know better than the people who dedicated their professional careers to studying a complex subject.Quite ironic to be labelled "hopeless" by someone who has such a hard time inferring meaning from text that you're only takeaway is coming up with two strawman statements about labs and "germs aren't real" and throwing out some super generalised term like "conspiracy theorist" based on nothing more than your own biases which cause you to slap stereotypes on anyone who disagrees with you. Also yes, if you believe all experts WITHOUT question and believe them 100% purely on the fact they are "experts" you're a fucking idiot, no questions asked. I'd seriously like to know your academic background because there's no way you've been through academia and still are under this completely naive and uneducated misconception of what a "expert" actually is. Also by the fact you have no idea what I meant by "threat analysis" you basically confirmed you weren't following the virus during January 2020 and yet have the audacity to give uninformed opinions on "experts" despite being oblivious to the actual response to the virus from early January 2020 to late February/early march. Reading a few articles doesn't suddenly make an area your area of expertise. If most experts disagree with you, you should probably take the hint. Or you know, join the crowd that "does their own research" but never seem to know anything and also believe that germs aren't really shit. Also your idea that people "read a few articles" seems like projection, as I said above cultivating a large enough knowledge base that can be used to contrast and test the validity of information one may come across takes thousands upon thousands of hours just to get a baseline and it will take an entire lifetime and you'll never truly reach a point of being a complete polymath however it sure as shit beats the completely unhealthy view you seem to hold for "experts" and the incredibly dangerous delegation of your cognitive functions to some 3rd party that in reality is just some person and/or a group of people prone to clear faults just as any other person/group and most likely have operated in a very secluded and niche academic setting for most of their life and while they may have a plethora of knowledge on this subject they honed in on this can create clear faults in their general knowledge base and thus can impact their decision making when it comes to how their actions may affect the wider world. For someone who goes on about other people being "clueless" and also one who has the belief that not all are intellectual equals you seem to have an inability to judge your own cluelessness and also seem to have completely forsaken self-learning to instead delegate that to the "experts" that may or may not be "correct" and you will have no means to filter out opinions that may have false elements in them precisely due to your own lack of a knowledge base. |
|
Cneq said: Every time you drive your car across a bridge you trust that the structural engineers did a proper job and built the bridge in a way that it can support multiple vehicles at the same time that each weigh tons - even though you don't understand anything about structural engineering yourself. Railey2 said: Insane, so you actually just straight up admitted you believe experts 100% purely on the basis that they are "experts" and due to you not wanting to spend the thousands of hours required to cultivate a vast knowledge base you instead, like I said, delegate those cognitive functions to be performed by "experts" so that you can live in willingly ignorance and take everything they say as truth.I believe experts in areas that aren't my areas of expertise, yes. It's called not being an arrogant fuck who thinks they know better than the people who dedicated their professional careers to studying a complex subject. Reading a few articles doesn't suddenly make an area your area of expertise. If most experts disagree with you, you should probably take the hint. Or you know, join the crowd that "does their own research" but never seem to know anything and also believe that germs aren't really shit. Also your idea that people "read a few articles" seems like projection, as I said above cultivating a large enough knowledge base that can be used to contrast and test the validity of information one may come across takes thousands upon thousands of hours just to get a baseline and it will take an entire lifetime and you'll never truly reach a point of being a complete polymath however it sure as shit beats the completely unhealthy view you seem to hold for "experts" and the incredibly dangerous delegation of your cognitive functions to some 3rd party that in reality is just some person and/or a group of people prone to clear faults just as any other person/group and most likely have operated in a very secluded and niche academic setting for most of their life and while they may have a plethora of knowledge on this subject they honed in on this can create clear faults in their general knowledge base and thus can impact their decision making when it comes to how their actions may affect the wider world. For someone who goes on about other people being "clueless" and also one who has the belief that not all are intellectual equals you seem to have an inability to judge your own cluelessness and also seem to have completely forsaken self-learning to instead delegate that to the "experts" that may or may not be "correct" and you will have no means to filter out opinions that may have false elements in them precisely due to your own lack of a knowledge base. Every time you eat mass-produced food that contains tens of different chemicals to make it last longer and taste better, you trust the chemists of food companies that they know what they're putting in there, and that they don't poison you - even though you don't understand anything about chemistry yourself. Every time you use a computer, you trust that it saves and stores your data without corrupting anything - even though you don't understand anything about computer science yourself. Every time you go to the doctor.. every time you board a plane.... every time you need legal counsel... .. . every time ... you get the idea. Believing experts isn't "dangerous", it's necessary and unavoidable. I can't doublecheck everything, and I can't put in 10.000 hours of intense study to become an expert myself in more than one or MAYBE two subjects. Acknowledging this isn't "living in ignorance", it's just how you function as a human being in a modern society. Now, I'm not particularly happy about the accusation that I hate learning and know nothing. In my opinion this isn't true at all. I believe that I know more than most people. But the more I learn, the more I realise how much I don't know and the more I understand how necessary experts really are. I am convinced that everyone who is as arrogant as you and pretends that they can just know everything to a point where they can stand against a consensus of thousands of experts, simply never achieved a level of knowledge in any discipline to come to the same realization. Most people don't even know enough to pass a statistics I course, and yet they tell me that they're doing their research. How, I might ask? You can't even read studies properly, if you lack that knowledge. But I get it. It's the age-old anti-intellectual meme that you're peddling. Believing experts is bad and means you're a sheep, even though these experts employ valid methods, uphold rigorous standards and so on. But floundering your way through articles of unknown source, following your confirmation bias to who knows where and reaching conclusions that are miles from what any established expert has to say on the issue? That's the rational thing to do. I call bullshit. People like you simply haven't realised how ignorant they truly are, that's the only way to explain the incredible arrogance with which you treat serious topics. Always pretending to know better. Always supposedly a step ahead. But the truth is much more simple: You're just an uneducated moron. |
Railey2May 4, 2022 3:16 PM
| *lampoons inwardly* |
Railey2 said: Jesus christ how can you make comparisons to "eating mass produced food" or "boarding a plane" or "driving across a bridge" and come to the conclusion that these are somehow comparable to ACADEMIC STUDIES run by a SINGLE cohort of "experts" in this case "virologists" which most of these studies are NEVER conducted by "thousands of experts" as you seem to believe.Cneq said: Every time you drive your car across a bridge you trust that the structural engineers did a proper job and built the bridge in a way that it can support multiple vehicles at the same time that each weigh tons - even though you don't understand anything about structural engineering yourself. Insane, so you actually just straight up admitted you believe experts 100% purely on the basis that they are "experts" and due to you not wanting to spend the thousands of hours required to cultivate a vast knowledge base you instead, like I said, delegate those cognitive functions to be performed by "experts" so that you can live in willingly ignorance and take everything they say as truth. Also your idea that people "read a few articles" seems like projection, as I said above cultivating a large enough knowledge base that can be used to contrast and test the validity of information one may come across takes thousands upon thousands of hours just to get a baseline and it will take an entire lifetime and you'll never truly reach a point of being a complete polymath however it sure as shit beats the completely unhealthy view you seem to hold for "experts" and the incredibly dangerous delegation of your cognitive functions to some 3rd party that in reality is just some person and/or a group of people prone to clear faults just as any other person/group and most likely have operated in a very secluded and niche academic setting for most of their life and while they may have a plethora of knowledge on this subject they honed in on this can create clear faults in their general knowledge base and thus can impact their decision making when it comes to how their actions may affect the wider world. For someone who goes on about other people being "clueless" and also one who has the belief that not all are intellectual equals you seem to have an inability to judge your own cluelessness and also seem to have completely forsaken self-learning to instead delegate that to the "experts" that may or may not be "correct" and you will have no means to filter out opinions that may have false elements in them precisely due to your own lack of a knowledge base. Every time you eat mass-produced food that contains tens of different chemicals to make it last longer and taste better, you trust the chemists of food companies that they know what they're putting in there, and that they don't poison you - even though you don't understand anything about chemistry yourself. Every time you use a computer, you trust that it saves and stores your data without corrupting anything - even though you don't understand anything about computer science yourself. Every time you go to the doctor.. every time you board a plane.... every time you need legal counsel... .. . every time ... you get the idea. Believing experts isn't "dangerous", it's necessary and unavoidable. I can't doublecheck everything, and I can't put in 10.000 hours of intense study to become an expert myself in more than one or MAYBE two subjects. Acknowledging this isn't "living in ignorance", it's just how you function as a human being in a modern society. Now, I'm not particularly happy about the accusation that I hate learning and know nothing. In my opinion this isn't true at all. I believe that I know more than most people. But the more I learn, the more I realise how much I don't know and the more I understand how necessary experts really are. I am convinced that everyone who is as arrogant as you and pretends that they can just know everything to a point where they can stand against a consensus of thousands of experts, simply never achieved a level of knowledge in any discipline to come to the same realization. Most people don't even know enough to pass a statistics I course, and yet they tell me that they're doing their research. How, I might ask? You can't even read studies properly, if you lack that knowledge. But I get it. It's the age-old anti-intellectual meme that you're peddling. Believing experts is bad and means you're a sheep, even though these experts employ valid methods, uphold rigorous standards and so on. But floundering your way through articles of unknown source, following your confirmation bias to who knows where and reaching conclusions that are miles from what any established expert has to say on the issue? That's the rational thing to do. I call bullshit. People like you simply haven't realised how ignorant they truly are, that's the only way to explain the incredible arrogance with which you treat serious topics. Always pretending to know better. Always supposedly a step ahead. But the truth is much more simple: You're just an uneducated moron. Do you have any fucking idea how enterprises work and the reality that almost all major engineering projects, all major product lines of mass produced food, all aspects of commercial flight literally have hundreds of distinct business process that incorporate thousands of people from just about every discipline you can think of and thoroughly go through every aspect of quality insurance by getting input from ALL experts to ensure something will work? This is NOT the same as the bullshit example of relying 100% on "virologists" that operate and conduct studies purely from the results of one virologist and/or a group of them and do so in a THOROUGHLY isolated setting from reality with zero congruence with the DOZENS of experts involved in the other major examples you just gave such as mass production of food or major engineering projects which DO NOT function on consensus of a few "experts" of only one specific field. And guess what? Even when HUNDREDS of "experts" work on massive projects/product lines and reach consensus they are CONSTANTLY failing and losing BILLIONS of dollars and this happens ALL THE TIME on a GLOBAL SCALE. And yet here you are trusting 1-3 people who are experts in only one field to conductive extremely low-scope studies and then have the audacity to "trust" them because you have no other choice precisely due to your ignorance. I mean holy shit saying I'm peddling anti-intellectual shit? mate you literally don't even seem to understand the difference between a small group of academics performing studies compared to enterprise level projects of hundreds of experts working in tandem. And not only that but most likely are oblivious to the fact said hundreds of experts working in tandem STILL always fail, constantly. Engineering project failure, commercial product failure, medical malpractice, enterprise system project failure, pharmaceutical failure and constant class action lawsuits, failure in almost every practise of law, economic failure and the list can go on and on for EVERY field "experts" guide. As someone who personally specializes in enterprise systems as my career path I'm well aware of how often "experts" constantly fuck up and if these "experts" didn't constantly fuck up EVERYONE would be unemployed since we'd be living in some sort of utopia where experts are all-knowing and make no mistakes like you seem to hold them up as. Once again, what is your academic background? what fields have you spent thousands of hours studying? You say I'm an "uneducated moron" yet you seem to have zero interactions with "experts" yourself and also seem to have zero interaction with enterprises nor how they function which has led you to come to the completely uneducated assumptions of comparing MASSIVE projects managed by thousands of different experts to academic studies run by at lowest 3 "virologists" and by no means every reaching the extent of consensus that major engineering projects/and or mass production of food products required by a very diverse set of experts. Not to mention you seem oblivious to the OUTSTANDING failure rate of these "experts" in EVERY FIELD, yes, EVERY FIELD with billions of dollars lost every year due to constant fuck ups by, yes, you guessed it, "experts" and yet you sit here proudly proclaiming you're so uneducated and lazy that you choose to delegate your cognitive functions to these very same "experts" that are constantly fucking up, insane lmao If that isn't the pinnacle of anti-intellectualism and the peak example of in your words an "uneducated moron" then I don't know what is. I'd seriously suggest you set aside so time to accomplish these two tasks: One: Go read through the THOUSANDS of the public case studies available for all the major fuck ups by "experts" in every field, go read engineering case studies, medical malpractice case studies/statistics, the literal HUNDREDS+ of class action lawsuits that come out against pharmaceutical companies on a yearly basis, product line failures, business collapses, government project failures and the list can go on. To start here's one, come back when you've read a few hundred. https://www.henricodolfing.com/2019/12/project-failure-case-study-queensland-health.html Two: GO BECOME AN EXPERT AND INTERACT WITH EXPERTS because holy shit I seriously doubt you hold a masters/PhD, there's no way ANYONE would be this uneducated and naive about "experts" if you actually were an "expert" yourself and had DAILY interactions with "experts". I mean holy shit if you aren't in academia and can't find experts that easily then at least just go and research the backgrounds of random experts online, these people are NORMAL and are CONSTANTLY prone to failure, period. After finishing those I highly doubt you'll be able to hold the same view on "experts" as you seem to do now. Also one more bonus step: Stop projecting so heavily, you literally accuse me of "confirmation bias" yet the moment someone questions "experts" you automatically tag them as being a "uneducated anti-intellectual conspiracy theorist" and whatever other tags that align with the heavily polarized political stereotype that you seem to see someone as. I mean holy shit the first words out of your mouth were about "labs" and "germ denial" despite my personal beliefs nor previous comments having anything to do with labs, where did that come from? once again, confirmation bias and you applying stereotypes. |
|
| If one of the two is purposefully trying to seem inferior, then yes. |
 |
| @Cneq it's clear that you're blind to how much expert knowledge goes into the products and services you use every day. Indeed, every time you cross a bridge, there is a huge extension of trust to the people who've built it, without you knowing anything about the process. I can't be bothered to read the rest of your post anymore, since it's probably just more incoherent rambling. I've skimmed it briefly, and I can already tell that you make the incredibly tired argument of "but experts are wrong sometimes so therefore...." Therefore nothing. Any process you use to gain knowledge is 100x worse and much more unreliable. Experts make mistakes and update their views as information changes, yes. They're not always correct. But they're much more consistently correct than your stupid facebook memes or anonymous blogs or hearsay from colleagues or wherever you get your incredibly ill-informed opinions from. Science isn't perfect, but it's still the best we can do. Nobody who argues that we shouldn't believe experts because mistakes and fuck-ups happen has a better alternative. So... I'll just quote myself and call it a day. "But the more I learn, the more I realise how much I don't know and the more I understand how necessary experts really are. I am convinced that everyone who is as arrogant as you and pretends that they can just know everything to a point where they can stand against a consensus of thousands of experts, simply never achieved a level of knowledge in any discipline to come to the same realization." only incredibly arrogant morons pretend that they know better than the people who spent their lives studying a subject. To anyone with a basic education, it's clear what you are. A clueless anti-intellectual with a very overblown opinion of himself. But at the end of the day, you're in the same group as the people who say that germ theory isn't real. :) |
| *lampoons inwardly* |
| @Cneq @Railey2 Architect & structural engineer & scientist speaking here :^) Trust is a complex issue which also depends on personal experience and portfolio/record of the person that we want to trust. Portfolio I have to say I have a very strong academic background, have published several papers in structural optimization and origami engineering, developing transportation network optimization software for US department of transportation (basically optimizing strategies for retrofitting hundreds of bridges in US east coast due to earth quake), also in several occasions become guest speakers for universities. But my involvement in real design and construction projects are still limited as compared to my friend who has focused on building his architectural practice career since second year of uni. He did not pursue degree in US, and rely only on his degree earned from my country. But for among my friends and the people who knows both me and him, they most likely trust him more to become their architect if there was a real project. This is an example of trust developed due to portfolio. Although we both are architects, even I have much stronger academic background + civil engineering degree + software development expertise, most people would still choose him probably, because he has handle more houses projects and likeable design as well. Personal Experience As for personal experience, it can depends on the fields and in extreme case generalization, its all subjective. Say, I trust something must be working in a certain brand if I have tried many products of that certain brand are also working as desired. Its statistical basically, sampling, then there would be certain level of confidence based on the statistical analysis on that sampling. For precision, one can do the exact calculation (computing sample mean of the score, standard deviation, then using some distributions [depends on number of samples and other aspects] to determine your confidence for generalization]), or do it more or less in your head. Psychology has the effect too on this personal experience factor. I have a chronic tailbone pain ongoing 5 years, sitting always cause me pain. I have tried various doctors, chiropractors, and other treatments, those only worsen me, mentally my trust to these fields has becoming less and less, statistically I give scores to their treatments based on the result of my pain (is it worsen or better?), and most of them worsen it (thus low score), then combined with the psychological aspect of being trauma of treatments by them, mentally I generalize that I cannot trust doctors and chiropractors no more to cure my tailbone, or at least my trust level has become so low on them. Statistics also applies to how we see others portfolio as well, we see how many projects one has already deal with, then we score them, then we choose to trust him. For instance, everybody knows Zaha Hadid is one of the best Deconstruction architect coz the consultant has designed so many public buildings with deconstruction characteristic, people would trust the consultant to build museum of deconstruction style for them. Frank Gehry likewise. Of course inside Zaha's architectural consultant, there is engineers as well, architects, etc to perhaps 20 - 100 people. But the brand "Zaha Hadid", people trust it even though she most likely does not deal with each project personally, coz too many projects around the world. So there is trust of public on her due to her portfolio, her name itself is a legend. But the more I learn, the more I realise how much I don't know and the more I understand how necessary experts really are I agree with this on a certain level, but absolutely not in general case. It depends on the two aspects above. Therefore probably its not gonna be 100% trust on experts or not trust, but can be somewhere in between, the trust level mostly depending on those 2 aspects. |
|
philtecturophy said: I agree it depends and some subjects are easier to get into than others, but for ANYTHING related to STEM, medicine, law etc. it is absolutely the case. Because these subjects exist on a level of depth that is unimaginable to the layman, which you'll know if you've ever dipped your toes into any of these.But the more I learn, the more I realise how much I don't know and the more I understand how necessary experts really are I agree with this on a certain level, but absolutely not in general case. It depends on the two aspects above. Therefore probably its not gonna be 100% trust on experts or not trust, but can be somewhere in between, the trust level mostly depending on those 2 aspects. For something like the production of a vaccine you absolutely need to err more on the side of trust than anything, because there's no way you can be as informed as the people who develop the thing on how exactly it functions and all the minor technical details. Also, the people who "don't trust" and "do their own research" tend to be absolute brainlets that don't know the first thing about anything. And I think we can both see how Cneq is just a classic anti-intellectual, based on the type of arguments he makes (like the one that goes "science makes mistakes, therefore we should use our own methods that are 100x more flawed lulxd"). I recommend paying him no mind from here on out. Absolute waste of time. |
| *lampoons inwardly* |
Railey2 said: philtecturophy said: I agree it depends and some subjects are easier to get into than others, but for ANYTHING related to STEM, medicine, law etc. it is absolutely the case. Because these subjects exist on a level of depth that is unimaginable to the layman, which you'll know if you've ever dipped your toes into any of these.But the more I learn, the more I realise how much I don't know and the more I understand how necessary experts really are I agree with this on a certain level, but absolutely not in general case. It depends on the two aspects above. Therefore probably its not gonna be 100% trust on experts or not trust, but can be somewhere in between, the trust level mostly depending on those 2 aspects. For something like the production of a vaccine you absolutely need to err more on the side of trust than anything, because there's no way you can be as informed as the people who develop the thing on how exactly it functions and all the minor technical details. Also, the people who "don't trust" and "do their own research" tend to be absolute brainlets that don't know the first thing about anything. And I think we can both see how Cneq is just a classic anti-intellectual, based on the type of arguments he makes (like the one that goes "science makes mistakes, therefore we should use our own methods that are 100x more flawed lulxd"). I recommend paying him no mind from here on out. Absolute waste of time. Yeah, engineering especially, things like Laplace PDE, theory of FEA, or even basic theories in structural mechanics are certainly not for layman to understand, or even look at them. It needs years of calculus, linear algebra, ODE, and for FEA many more prerequisites, let alone earthquake engineering and complex topic such as structural topology optimization. But yeah, I managed to passed all those, and still, sometimes some of my layman friends see my experienced architect friend in practice more trusted in AEC field than me, how saddening is that. In the end, degrees are not enough, not everyone appreciates academic degrees and publications (so my achievements in publishing things are ignored as well by these laymen). At least in AEC, portfolio is a big deal, and becoming doctors also portfolio is a big deal Anyway, yes I know its difficult to get a degree in medicine as well, perhaps as difficult as engineering. I was just dissappointed how they could not cure my chronic tailbone pain for all these years. Thats why, personal experience affects how I see this field as well, becomes more and more negative. Perhaps I am a bit too generalizing as well here |
|
Railey2 said: AHAHAHAH once again with the uneducated stereotypes and confirmation bias going on about "facebook memes" holy shit mate.@Cneq it's clear that you're blind to how much expert knowledge goes into the products and services you use every day. Indeed, every time you cross a bridge, there is a huge extension of trust to the people who've built it, without you knowing anything about the process. I can't be bothered to read the rest of your post anymore, since it's probably just more incoherent rambling. I've skimmed it briefly, and I can already tell that you make the incredibly tired argument of "but experts are wrong sometimes so therefore...." Therefore nothing. Any process you use to gain knowledge is 100x worse and much more unreliable. Experts make mistakes and update their views as information changes, yes. They're not always correct. But they're much more consistently correct than your stupid facebook memes or anonymous blogs or hearsay from colleagues or wherever you get your incredibly ill-informed opinions from. Science isn't perfect, but it's still the best we can do. Nobody who argues that we shouldn't believe experts because mistakes and fuck-ups happen has a better alternative. So... I'll just quote myself and call it a day. "But the more I learn, the more I realise how much I don't know and the more I understand how necessary experts really are. I am convinced that everyone who is as arrogant as you and pretends that they can just know everything to a point where they can stand against a consensus of thousands of experts, simply never achieved a level of knowledge in any discipline to come to the same realization." only incredibly arrogant morons pretend that they know better than the people who spent their lives studying a subject. To anyone with a basic education, it's clear what you are. A clueless anti-intellectual with a very overblown opinion of himself. But at the end of the day, you're in the same group as the people who say that germ theory isn't real. :) And all that's left is your dumb ass quote that you fail ONE HUNDRED PERCENT to live up to due to your outright ignorance, especially when you say this right after: "I agree it depends and some subjects are easier to get into than others, but for ANYTHING related to STEM, medicine, law etc. it is absolutely the case. Because these subjects exist on a level of depth that is unimaginable to the layman, which you'll know if you've ever dipped your toes into any of these." Like holy shit you do realize you, someone who most likely LACKS a degree and thousands of hours of experience in these subjects with "unimaginable depth to a layman" are calling someone who's been in academia in STEM for over five years with certifications and nearing completion on said degree with a 6.66/7 GPA a quote on quote: "To anyone with a basic education, it's clear what you are. A clueless anti-intellectual with a very overblown opinion of himself. " And that's putting aside the literal life time of experience with the pharmaceutical industry/US medical system and getting involved with every specialist you can think of due to one of my relatives being incredibly ill and personally winning a legal battle and getting a settlement offer from said pharmaceutical industry by the biggest player in the field [one which makes your oh so precious vaccines]. Your profound refusal to confront your own ignorance and the absolute reliance on branding people as this mental stereotype you have in your head is the very peak of being anti-intellectual. |
|
Cneq said: "we got a lawyer once and got a settlement against a pharmaceutical company, now this qualifies me to talk about the state of academia, the ENTIRE pharma industry and peddle science denial LUL". Great logic. Do I even need to explain why I don't care about anecdotes? Did YOU pass statistics I? And if you did, why do you argue like this? This is some "my grandpa smokes every day and didn't get cancer, therefore cigarettes are harmless"-type thinking. I don't give a shit about your individual case, it signifies nothing. And if by "I had to do with experts" you mean "the lawyer told us what to do and so we did", then great. Also irrelevant af.Railey2 said: AHAHAHAH once again with the uneducated stereotypes and confirmation bias going on about "facebook memes" holy shit mate.@Cneq it's clear that you're blind to how much expert knowledge goes into the products and services you use every day. Indeed, every time you cross a bridge, there is a huge extension of trust to the people who've built it, without you knowing anything about the process. I can't be bothered to read the rest of your post anymore, since it's probably just more incoherent rambling. I've skimmed it briefly, and I can already tell that you make the incredibly tired argument of "but experts are wrong sometimes so therefore...." Therefore nothing. Any process you use to gain knowledge is 100x worse and much more unreliable. Experts make mistakes and update their views as information changes, yes. They're not always correct. But they're much more consistently correct than your stupid facebook memes or anonymous blogs or hearsay from colleagues or wherever you get your incredibly ill-informed opinions from. Science isn't perfect, but it's still the best we can do. Nobody who argues that we shouldn't believe experts because mistakes and fuck-ups happen has a better alternative. So... I'll just quote myself and call it a day. "But the more I learn, the more I realise how much I don't know and the more I understand how necessary experts really are. I am convinced that everyone who is as arrogant as you and pretends that they can just know everything to a point where they can stand against a consensus of thousands of experts, simply never achieved a level of knowledge in any discipline to come to the same realization." only incredibly arrogant morons pretend that they know better than the people who spent their lives studying a subject. To anyone with a basic education, it's clear what you are. A clueless anti-intellectual with a very overblown opinion of himself. But at the end of the day, you're in the same group as the people who say that germ theory isn't real. :) And all that's left is your dumb ass quote that you fail ONE HUNDRED PERCENT to live up to due to your outright ignorance, especially when you say this right after: "I agree it depends and some subjects are easier to get into than others, but for ANYTHING related to STEM, medicine, law etc. it is absolutely the case. Because these subjects exist on a level of depth that is unimaginable to the layman, which you'll know if you've ever dipped your toes into any of these." Like holy shit you do realize you, someone who most likely LACKS a degree and thousands of hours of experience in these subjects with "unimaginable depth to a layman" are calling someone who's been in academia in STEM for over five years with certifications and nearing completion on said degree with a 6.66/7 GPA a quote on quote: "To anyone with a basic education, it's clear what you are. A clueless anti-intellectual with a very overblown opinion of himself. " And that's putting aside the literal life time of experience with the pharmaceutical industry/US medical system and getting involved with every specialist you can think of due to one of my relatives being incredibly ill and personally winning a legal battle and getting a settlement offer from said pharmaceutical industry by the biggest player in the field [one which makes your oh so precious vaccines]. Your profound refusal to confront your own ignorance and the absolute reliance on branding people as this mental stereotype you have in your head is the very peak of being anti-intellectual. get outta here. Literal life time of experience? You're born in 1999, sit the fuck down. I highly doubt you're in STEM either, or else you wouldn't be so fucking arrogant and talk with such confidence about shit you know nothing about. Or maybe, MAYBE you're one of these people who just can't draw the proper conclusions from what they've learned, one of the people who just mindlessly study and regurgitate what they've learned when the exam comes around, then forget it all immediately. How someone can get through an entire STEM degree and then reach that far beyond their station in a different discipline is beyond me. You must be real special to even think of doing something like that. If this is what's going on then wow. Even more embarrassing for you. You're the kind of person who has no medical background, goes to the doctor and then starts disagreeing with them. |
Railey2May 5, 2022 2:21 PM
| *lampoons inwardly* |
Railey2 said: Yes, literal life time of experience. I've made it clear many times on here that my life at this state could be transposed into a pretty massive biography so I'd highly suggest you do not contrast your own uninteresting and strife-free life as a basis to compare to others.Cneq said: "we got a lawyer once and got a settlement against a pharmaceutical company, now this qualifies me to talk about the state of academia, the ENTIRE pharma industry and peddle science denial LUL". Great logic. Do I even need to explain why I don't care about anecdotes? Did YOU pass statistics I? And if you did, why do you argue like this? This is some "my grandpa smokes every day and didn't get cancer, therefore cigarettes are harmless"-type thinking. I don't give a shit about your individual case, it signifies nothing. And if by "I had to do with experts" you mean "the lawyer told us what to do and so we did", then great. Also irrelevant af.AHAHAHAH once again with the uneducated stereotypes and confirmation bias going on about "facebook memes" holy shit mate. And all that's left is your dumb ass quote that you fail ONE HUNDRED PERCENT to live up to due to your outright ignorance, especially when you say this right after: "I agree it depends and some subjects are easier to get into than others, but for ANYTHING related to STEM, medicine, law etc. it is absolutely the case. Because these subjects exist on a level of depth that is unimaginable to the layman, which you'll know if you've ever dipped your toes into any of these." Like holy shit you do realize you, someone who most likely LACKS a degree and thousands of hours of experience in these subjects with "unimaginable depth to a layman" are calling someone who's been in academia in STEM for over five years with certifications and nearing completion on said degree with a 6.66/7 GPA a quote on quote: "To anyone with a basic education, it's clear what you are. A clueless anti-intellectual with a very overblown opinion of himself. " And that's putting aside the literal life time of experience with the pharmaceutical industry/US medical system and getting involved with every specialist you can think of due to one of my relatives being incredibly ill and personally winning a legal battle and getting a settlement offer from said pharmaceutical industry by the biggest player in the field [one which makes your oh so precious vaccines]. Your profound refusal to confront your own ignorance and the absolute reliance on branding people as this mental stereotype you have in your head is the very peak of being anti-intellectual. get outta here. Literal life time of experience? You're born in 1999, sit the fuck down. I highly doubt you're in STEM either, or else you wouldn't be so fucking arrogant and talk with such confidence about shit you know nothing about. Or maybe, MAYBE you're one of these people who just can't draw the proper conclusions from what they've learned, one of the people who just mindlessly study and regurgitate what they've learned when the exam comes around, then forget it all immediately. How someone can get through an entire STEM degree and then reach that far beyond their station in a different discipline is beyond me. You must be real special to even think of doing something like that. If this is what's going on then wow. Even more embarrassing for you. When it comes to anecdotes the point was that you most likely have ZERO experience with the medical industry and yet have the audacity and arrogance to call out others who literally have closely worked with it for over a decade. @philtecturophy seems to realize this due to also dealing with the medical industry so closely [and by extension realizing the gross incompetence and their inability to solve issues] but even then a back issue is a fairly common case and the things I've personally spent years in contact with made that look like a sprained ankle. Coming back to the main topic this over use of the word "arrogance" really needs to be addressed. Have you even given thought to the fact that YOU may be the one who is so incredibly arrogant that despite your own complete lack of education/general knowledge you STILL have the audacity to believe you somehow know better than a 6.66 GPA STEM student who's been in academia for multiple years prior to that even? Have you ever considered that your detachment from academia and the lack of a extremely large reaching knowledge base is the reason you seem to overestimate experts and by extension stay isolated in your own ignorance and fully content fuelling your own ego by calling out the "hur hur dumb anti-vax anti-intellectual uneducated conspiracy theorists" ? If you actually have the integrity to perform some deep introspection and actually take the time to gain a far larger amount of knowledge I believe you should be able to answer this question objectively and you would solve basically all of your intellectual failing and clear misconceptions on the nature of "experts". I'd also suggest fixing your clearly polarized political mindset, you seem completely shackled to western political tribalism and thus have become incapable to be objective without relying heavily on your own clear bias and grouping people into clearly defined groups that hold no basis in reality. |
|
Cneq said: You REALLY think you're that special, huh. Yes, literal life time of experience. I've made it clear many times on here that my life at this state could be transposed into a pretty massive biography so I'd highly suggest you do not contrast your own uninteresting and strife-free life as a basis to compare to others. Once again, born in 1999. Your arrogance knows no bounds. Tell me again, what's your GPA? 6.66, wow I'm impressed, veeery well done son, you're such a smart kid. Despite you calling me arrogant, I'm not the one flexing my "achievements" or throwing around my credentials. Not because I have none but because a) they're none of your business b) it's not relevant to the argument I'm making at all But sure, maybe you can tell my arrogant self again what your GPA is? I forgot what it was, maybe you can remind me? Something above 6? Impressive. Weeeell done. I love how people always reveal who they are when you poke and prod a little. You're Mr. "I might only be in my early 20s but my life could be transposed into a pretty massive biography and also look at my grades they're so good, also you're so arrogant omg". ok I think I need to stop here, I'm about to fall out of my chair, laughing. Not that I didn't see this coming after your rant on how experts aint shit and how believing them is insanity. Only someone truly arrogant can spit in the face of real expertise and pretend to know better. |
Railey2May 5, 2022 2:52 PM
| *lampoons inwardly* |
Railey2 said: Aahahahah, what's that? Your own academic background is NOT relevant in a discussion about the credibility of experts? Why? Because you personally lack one? AHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHACneq said: You REALLY think you're that special, huh. Yes, literal life time of experience. I've made it clear many times on here that my life at this state could be transposed into a pretty massive biography so I'd highly suggest you do not contrast your own uninteresting and strife-free life as a basis to compare to others. Once again, born in 1999. Your arrogance knows no bounds. Tell me again, what's your GPA? 6.66, wow I'm impressed, veeery well done son, you're such a smart kid. Despite you calling me arrogant, I'm not the one flexing my "achievements" or throwing around my credentials. Not because I have none but because a) they're none of your business b) it's not relevant to the argument I'm making at all But sure, maybe you can tell my arrogant self again what your GPA is? I forgot what it was, maybe you can remind me? Something above 6? Impressive. Weeeell done. I love how people always reveal who they are when you poke and prod a little. You're Mr. "I might only be in my early 20s but my life could be transposed into a pretty massive biography and also look at my grades they're so good, also you're so arrogant omg". ok I think I need to stop here, I'm about to fall out of my chair, laughing. Not that I didn't see this coming after your rant on how experts aint shit and how believing them is insanity. Only someone truly arrogant can spit in the face of real expertise and pretend to know better. Also it's kind of ironic that the roles are reversed in which the non-expert is arguing with an expert on how experts are perfect and the experts is arguing to the contrary, quite poetic lmao Mate come now, be honest and stop it with the: "Not because I have none but because they're none of your business" You clearly lack a academic background [and or are a dropout, go figure] and that is literally the reason for your ignorance/overestimation of experts which I clearly pointed out. The fact you still seem unable to confront this point basically cements the fact you lack the integrity required for self-introspection and I honestly shouldn't be surprised. After all if you actually had integrity you most likely wouldn't be this ignorant and by extension not engaging in futile debates that are clearly over your head. Take a step back, get educated and then maybe you'll be in a position for discourse. |
|
More topics from this board
» How do you manage with overthinking / self-control?Cute_Marseille - Oct 20 |
19 |
by XMGA030
»»
15 minutes ago |
|
» It does not matter what you do in this life...AllAlone8 - 5 hours ago |
7 |
by XMGA030
»»
29 minutes ago |
|
» How has your life changed in the last three years?Cneq - 9 hours ago |
13 |
by Little_Sheepling
»»
50 minutes ago |
|
» F1 or any motorsports fans? Who is your favorite driver or team?relsruj - Yesterday |
3 |
by Zarutaku
»»
1 hour ago |
|
» How many people have you told "I love you" to?Zakatsuki_ - Oct 18 |
23 |
by Spast1c
»»
1 hour ago |