I've just come to the realization that you think about "liberals" in a fundamentally different way from others - you think in terms of groups of people, rather than in terms of individuals.Felix the Cat wrote:
I've just come to the realization that liberals think about politics in a fundamentally different way from others - they think in terms of groups of people, rather than in terms of individuals.
Things you like about America ?
Moderator: Moderators
here i just had to do it...
-
Felix the Cat
- Posts: 2383
- Joined: 15 Jun 2005, 17:30
Thinking about massive populations in terms of groups of people is the only way to discuss them.
What do you want me to do? Get personal anecdotes from the 200 million people that live here? Everyone has to make generalizations - this is made clearly evident by the hilarious fact that you made one about me, and that's not a bad thing unless people think that they occur 100% of the time with no distribution from the average. In other words, if you think that 100% of liberals think in the exact same way, which your last post leads me to believe, then that is dumb.
You see, I'm talking about trends in my original post. Trends don't necessitate what ALWAYS happen, but rather what generally happens (hence the term, generalization).
Do you know what a bell curve is? Most black people do in fact have dark skin, this is a correct generalization! At the same time, there are fringes on the bell curve of skin-color for people of African descent (which btw is another generalization, there are tons of half black, 25% black, 93.75% black, etc, so bear with me we are generalizing again here!!!). Some black people have very light colored skin, and some black people are so black that they are like seriously really really black. Some black people are albino, but not most of them!
Don't just throw away generalizations as being idiotic, because they are pointing out the peak of bell curves. There are fringes on either end of the bell curve that are less frequent.
What do you want me to do? Get personal anecdotes from the 200 million people that live here? Everyone has to make generalizations - this is made clearly evident by the hilarious fact that you made one about me, and that's not a bad thing unless people think that they occur 100% of the time with no distribution from the average. In other words, if you think that 100% of liberals think in the exact same way, which your last post leads me to believe, then that is dumb.
You see, I'm talking about trends in my original post. Trends don't necessitate what ALWAYS happen, but rather what generally happens (hence the term, generalization).
Do you know what a bell curve is? Most black people do in fact have dark skin, this is a correct generalization! At the same time, there are fringes on the bell curve of skin-color for people of African descent (which btw is another generalization, there are tons of half black, 25% black, 93.75% black, etc, so bear with me we are generalizing again here!!!). Some black people have very light colored skin, and some black people are so black that they are like seriously really really black. Some black people are albino, but not most of them!
Don't just throw away generalizations as being idiotic, because they are pointing out the peak of bell curves. There are fringes on either end of the bell curve that are less frequent.
Did the lead car roll over, or was this a standard thread derailment? I can't even find a train of thought in these posts to guide me. I suspected a rusty old spiked, but evidently the passengers have brought this calamity upon themselves. Well, I'm no conductor, but at least I know the lay of the track.
First of all, liberalism has meant, does mean, and will mean a variety of different things to different people in different places and times. Classical liberalism is very different from modern European liberalism, which is again different from modern American liberalism. You will not come to a consensus on the meaning of the label, do not attempt to do so. It has meaning only as you append such.
Second, facts are not impervious to question. A fact is merely an opinion, idea or view which has not, thus far, been disproved to your knowledge. Innocent of distortion, until proven otherwise.
Third, the weaknesses and strengths of Socialism are not on trial here. To be fair, my own evaluation of socialist systems in comparison to capitalist and modeled feudal economies does indicate similar trends to those hunterw referred to. However, I make no value judgment.
Fourth, the human mind, as conceptualized by modern psychologists, processes data in schema, that is to say, rule-limited mental groupings. Generalizations, stereotypes and over-simplifications are the norm because your mind is designed to streamline and reduce complex content into easily accessed and analyzed compartments. In my analysis, all individuals I have met categorize people into groups, regardless of their own background, beliefs or status. Upside; the average situation is simple and coherent. Downside; the abberant situation is unaccounted for, and nearly all people, under close observation, exhibit prejudice of some sort - conscious or unconscious.
What does all of this mean? Well, really, it serves to inform. However, I hope you will think about these highly condensed points and move on to another topic, because whatever this thread was, it is no longer.
First of all, liberalism has meant, does mean, and will mean a variety of different things to different people in different places and times. Classical liberalism is very different from modern European liberalism, which is again different from modern American liberalism. You will not come to a consensus on the meaning of the label, do not attempt to do so. It has meaning only as you append such.
Second, facts are not impervious to question. A fact is merely an opinion, idea or view which has not, thus far, been disproved to your knowledge. Innocent of distortion, until proven otherwise.
Third, the weaknesses and strengths of Socialism are not on trial here. To be fair, my own evaluation of socialist systems in comparison to capitalist and modeled feudal economies does indicate similar trends to those hunterw referred to. However, I make no value judgment.
Fourth, the human mind, as conceptualized by modern psychologists, processes data in schema, that is to say, rule-limited mental groupings. Generalizations, stereotypes and over-simplifications are the norm because your mind is designed to streamline and reduce complex content into easily accessed and analyzed compartments. In my analysis, all individuals I have met categorize people into groups, regardless of their own background, beliefs or status. Upside; the average situation is simple and coherent. Downside; the abberant situation is unaccounted for, and nearly all people, under close observation, exhibit prejudice of some sort - conscious or unconscious.
What does all of this mean? Well, really, it serves to inform. However, I hope you will think about these highly condensed points and move on to another topic, because whatever this thread was, it is no longer.
Things I like about the US:
- TA
- Expand & Exterminate (Fang is American, right? If not then ignore this)
- Star Wars
- B-2 stealth bombers: they are very cool despite they were designed for massive killing
- SR-71 Blackbird
- Boeing 787
- Aerogel
- Monk (TV show)
- The Amazing Race (TV show)
- Great universities and professors
- TA
- Expand & Exterminate (Fang is American, right? If not then ignore this)
- Star Wars
- B-2 stealth bombers: they are very cool despite they were designed for massive killing
- SR-71 Blackbird
- Boeing 787
- Aerogel
- Monk (TV show)
- The Amazing Race (TV show)
- Great universities and professors
-
KingRaptor
- Zero-K Developer
- Posts: 838
- Joined: 14 Mar 2007, 03:44
