War Room OT Discussion v2

[Quipling]

Yeah, your post doesnt say or mean anything. You're also a Zionist so it's easy for you mislabel people to deflect criticism and attempt to shutdown discourse.

e

 

[VivaRevolution]

"You must be great at parties"

I agree the forum can help you learn to stay level headed when having a conversation about it. I think some people naturally attach ideas too closely to their identity and when they see someone arguing against the idea (even when they are trying to defend it), they assume they are being attacked. It's just a lack of being put in that situation and easily can be adjusted.

I never understood how deep this identity thing ran, until I realized a version of this in myself when discussing CT' s.

The Bigfoot debate in a thread recently was a example of this. In the past I would have been drawn into a actual defense of bigfoot, even though I hold the position of thinking it plausible but highly unlikely. I had in the past more closely attached myself to a CT based on how often I defended it over time, eventually leading to holding irrational positions. In my defense of an idea, it basically triggered an psycological attachment that somehow was interwoven to my political identity. Basically, my thoughts and ideas were being influenced by identity and the psychological impact an attack on my identity had.

I guess that is a silver lining to all of this identity politics, tribalism, and psychological warfare. It is basically a education through running a crucible.

 

[Lead]

I never understood how deep this identity thing ran, until I realized a version of this in myself when discussing CT' s.

The Bigfoot debate in a thread recently was a example of this. In the past I would have been drawn into a actual defense of bigfoot, even though I hold the position of thinking it plausible but highly unlikely. I had in the past more closely attached myself to a CT based on how often I defended it over time, eventually leading to holding irrational positions. In my defense of an idea, it basically triggered an psycological attachment that somehow was interwoven to my political identity. Basically, my thoughts and ideas were being influenced by identity and the psychological impact an attack on my identity had.

I guess that is a silver lining to all of this identity politics, tribalism, and psychological warfare. It is basically a education through running a crucible.

Identity politics ruins discussion. All the motions of the talk still happen but nothing usually is being accomplished as the goals have changed.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Identity politics ruins discussion. All the motions of the talk still happen but nothing usually is being accomplished as the goals have changed.

This is why the bet thread is so good and why betting is generally so valuable. People are forced to accept objective reality and step back from acceptance of tribal reality. It should be used more. Every time I disagree with someone, I think, "how can this translate to different predictions." Unfortunately, sometimes it's too far out to make betting worth it. And I think a lot of people back off in the face of the offer. I started ignoring KONE when he made a bullshit allegation, and I made a "put up or shut up" offer (account bet that he was wrong), and he A) refused and B) continued to make the allegation.

 

[Lead]

This is why the bet thread is so good and why betting is generally so valuable. People are forced to accept objective reality and step back from acceptance of tribal reality. It should be used more. Every time I disagree with someone, I think, "how can this translate to different predictions." Unfortunately, sometimes it's too far out to make betting worth it. And I think a lot of people back off in the face of the offer. I started ignoring KONE when he made a bullshit allegation, and I made a "put up or shut up" offer (account bet that he was wrong), and he A) refused and B) continued to make the allegation.

I like the thread. Makes for some funny awkward silences when bet is pulled in there or we actually get to see people who are as sure as they say. I agree there are a lot of things that make it hard to come up with objective bets for but when they occur, makes things a little more interesting around here

 

[Jack V Savage]

I like the thread. Makes for some funny awkward silences when bet is pulled in there or we actually get to see people who are as sure as they say. I agree there are a lot of things that make it hard to come up with objective bets for but when they occur, makes things a little more interesting around here

More than just that, it forces a focus on objective reality as opposed to tribal reality (and reveals it when people are incapable of pulling that off). Normally, incentives reward the opposite. If you express belief in tribal reality, you get affirmation from people you like and respect, and you feel part of a group. Expressing belief in objective reality (unless it happens to coincide with tribal reality) doesn't really get you anything, except an inner feeling of rightness.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Here's another good example of how changing incentives works. @IngaVovchanchyn said this about Elizabeth Warren's apparently false belief that she had Native American ancestry:

"A white Democrat exploiting resources supposedly set aside for minorities...what a surprise."
and then: "She used it to help herself get a job with Harvard."

I called her out on lying about that, and she said:

"I said that she falsely claimed native American ancestry (in) a situation where it would be advantageous to her."

After being put in a position where her own honesty was being challenged, her incentive was no longer to make the most outrageous claim possible to get pats on the backs from trolls like Dontsnitch, SMEAC, Heretic, etc. So she significantly modified her claim. That's kind of what betting challenges (that aren't accepted) usually do.

 

[AgonyandIrony]

Yeah, your post doesnt say or mean anything. You're also a Zionist so it's easy for you mislabel people to deflect criticism and attempt to shutdown discourse.

I don't really care what you think about me. If there is a certain issue or stance or quote that you disagree with me about then go ahead. But saying to me that "you kinda come off as a blaha blaha" doesn't mean anything.

Btw- the WR OGs know I'm the furthest thing from white. I've claimed the same brown race years ago when i was leftist here and im the same brown race i am today as a right winger.

So fuck what you think snowflake.

Lol at Zionist. Im legit curious where you got that idea from. I think this weird phenomena where Americans put Israel first is often borderline creepy. Although I am a big fan of Ehud Barak. Dude is a straight G.

Don't know why you're so butthurt. I pointed out that you kinda come across as one in race threads.

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

Here's another good example of how changing incentives works. @IngaVovchanchyn said this about Elizabeth Warren's apparently false belief that she had Native American ancestry:

"A white Democrat exploiting resources supposedly set aside for minorities...what a surprise."
and then: "She used it to help herself get a job with Harvard."

I called her out on lying about that, and she said:

"I said that she falsely claimed native American ancestry (in) a situation where it would be advantageous to her."

After being put in a position where her own honesty was being challenged, her incentive was no longer to make the most outrageous claim possible to get pats on the backs from trolls like Dontsnitch, SMEAC, Heretic, etc. So she significantly modified her claim. That's kind of what betting challenges (that aren't accepted) usually do.

How are these three claims different besides the first being general and then the other two being more specific? I moved from a general statement to a specific one because you yourself asked me for specific details about my general claim.

Geez Jack.

 

[Lead]

Looks like the war room has two comain events right here. Do the winners face off after?

 

[Jack V Savage]

How are these three claims different besides the first being general and then the other two being more specific? I moved from a general statement to a specific one because you yourself asked me for specific details about my general claim.

Geez Jack.

First you said that she used her likely false belief that she had a small amount of NA ancestry to get the job. Then you changed it to the less obviously dishonest claim that she falsely claimed to have that ancestry in a situation (working as an academic?) where it would be advantageous to her. It's right there. What's in the quotation marks are exact quotes from you.

Looks like the war room has two comain events right here. Do the winners face off after?

As much as I see it, I can't get over the way people just blatantly make knowingly false, and easily disproved claims.

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

First you said that she used her likely false belief that she had a small amount of NA ancestry to get the job. Then you changed it to the less obviously dishonest claim that she falsely claimed to have that ancestry in a situation (working as an academic?) where it would be advantageous to her. It's right there. What's in the quotation marks are exact quotes from you.

Did I ever claim Warren believed her own claim? I don't recall doing so. I do not think she does.

But no, those two phrases do not represent me stepping down my claims. She lied to get a job. Later i said, she lied when it was advantageous. What advantage? A job.

You keep on with this argument, despite the fact I obviously have not stepped down my claims on Warren and have repeated the stronger form several times while quoting you since you started this argument.

As much as I see it, I can't get over the way people just blatantly make knowingly false, and easily disproved claims.

It's true. People lie. Most certainly I have lied my fair amount in my life, though generally I am an honest person. You seem to think you've caught me in a few, though mostly it is this odd kind of parsing through my statements to see if you can find any hairs to split.

What I find funny is that you do not seem to actually value honesty, so much as you use accusations of dishonesty as a tool to frame any debate you find yourself in.

 

[Bald1]

As always, this thread delivers.

As much as I like @Limbo Pete , I think the powers that be made a colossal mistake by not modding @senri . While I have no idea where he stands on any particular issue, having him interact with some of our God squad (said with fondness) as a mod would have been a surreal experience. <Lmaoo>

 

[Jack V Savage]

Did I ever claim Warren believed her own claim? I don't recall doing so. I do not think she does.

It's not a lie if she doesn't believe the claims, though I guess you're using the standard definition of "lie" as "something that someone who isn't a Republican says."

What I find funny is that you do not seem to actually value honesty, so much as you use accusations of dishonesty as a tool to frame any debate you find yourself in.

Not at all. I value honesty extremely highly, which is precisely why I cannot fathom someone with your approach.

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

It's not a lie if she doesn't believe the claims, though I guess you're using the standard definition of "lie" as "something that someone who isn't a Republican says."

What? I am saying I do not think that Warren believes her own claim. Also, I have no problem calling a Republican a liar or saying that a Democrat told the truth.

And no, honesty doesn't seem to matter much to you. Dishonesty matters to you, because accusations of it are useful tools to manipulate conversations.

 

[Jack V Savage]

What? I am saying I do not think that Warren believes her own claim. Also, I have no problem calling a Republican a liar or saying that a Democrat told the truth.

And no, honesty doesn't seem to matter much to you. Dishonesty matters to you, because accusations of it are useful tools to manipulate conversations.

You know what you can do to really fuck with me, then? Maybe stop lying all the time. Then you'd take this "tool" from me! Do it, Inga. Stick it to me. You can be a better person and (assuming that your accusation here isn't completely crazy) hurt me at the same time.

 

[Jorge Luis Borges]

You know what you can do to really fuck with me, then? Maybe stop lying all the time. Then you'd take this "tool" from me! Do it, Inga. Stick it to me. You can be a better person and (assuming that your accusation here isn't completely crazy) hurt me at the same time.

Oh, that's easy, because I don't really lie very often.

 

[lecter]

Thread Starting
- Do not post multiple threads in one day

 

[Sycho Sid]

Well so much for Nunes.

Was not hyped for the fight at all, but still a bummer to lose another fight on the card. Especially day of.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Oh, that's easy, because I don't really lie very often.

Really? If you don't lie in your next 50 WR posts (a lot so you don't try to change to win), I'll say a prayer for you and post a word of appreciation. Good luck!