RSS
 

Archive for the ‘Epistemology’ Category

Yeah, the MSM

11 Dec

just got humiliated.

These guys don’t tell the truth, except when the truth happens to coincide with their pre-conceived notions. And that is not very often.

You need to understand that you are NOT getting the truth from these sources. You are only getting opinions, and what makes their opinions better than any other person’s? Huh?

The MSM turning to the “dark side” means the end of reliable reporting. These are NOT reporters, they are merely partisan shills. We live in a Post-Modern world…

 

Roy Moore is very likely to win, and

28 Nov

there is ONE reason:

The mainstream media.

Look, the Mainstream Media have been horribly corrupt and unreliable. And their attacks (cloaked as “reporting”) are always against one side and one side only. I mean, do you see the MSM going after John Conyers or Al  Franken? No, of course you don’t. Did they go after Al Gore or Bill Clinton? Fat chance. The MSM are widely (and correctly) seen as complete partisan suck-ups and hacks. They are the Grover Dill of the political world. They are simply NOT reliable. They have lost the trust of most rational Americans. They defend those who think like they do and attack the “other.” Most thinking people have come to the realization that they just don’t tell the truth unless it benefits them personally–they very much have a dog in this fight. They are NOT a disinterested third party! In essence, they have no credibility. They are NOT Truth-Tellers.

So when they whinge about Roy Moore, it is easy to both ignore and to want to vote opposite of what they are telling you in order to resist them. It is a way of saying, “Kiss my butt!”At some point Ralphie “breaks” and fights back. And then they run a far-left abortophile against Moore! In ALABAMA! Huh? What freakin’ Einstein thought of THAT? <sheesh!>

Leftist are missing a HUGE and important aspect of this, and it is the very same impulse that landed Trump in the White House in the first place. It is the same impulse that will lead to the Democrats being shellacked in 2018 and 2020, if they are not a whole lot more wise than we have seen so far. It is  the same impulse that led to the Tea Party (crushed under the heel of the Obama IRS boot, if you recall). Yes, there is “a resistance,” but it is on the right, not the Left. And it is rather a silent resistance. The Left is just crying and throwing a tantrum because they didn’t get the lollipop they wanted and they think that if they just hold their collective breath long enough and kick the floor hard enough they will eventually get it. But the Right is far more serious. FAR. Serious as a heart attack. And RINOs also are endangered. Only a great fool thinks that the “mushy middle” is a good and safe place to be right now. We call those people who do, “The Unemployed.”

Leftists are either not aware or are ignoring the fact that people on the Right are pissed. They are mad as Hell and are not going to take it much longer. Trump is not a cause, he is a symptom. And the Left is certainly not addressing this issue with its geriatric old-school Leftism. Nor are the tone-deaf “never Trump” folks who are putatively on the right.

 

Your MSM

23 Nov

at work.

Why on earth would any rational person even listen to these fools? This is a complete dumpster fire!

The MSM pretends to give you real information about Trump. But why oh why would anyone believe them? I mean, honestly!

And I am quite certain that this will have a significant impact on the 2018 and 2020 races. A lot of people are getting to the point where they just don’t care what the MSM says. They correctly note that there is just no way to know if it really is true, and the MSM are demonstrably unreliable.

So the NY Times reports X? So what? Why on earth should I believe them? Maybe what they say is true, and maybe it is a lie. Or more likely, it is partially true but the “gist” of the story is a lie.

But honestly, tell me why I should believe them. Tradition?

 
Comments Off on Your MSM

Posted in Corruption, Dog-faced Baboon, Epistemology, Media Untrustworthiness

 

Yes, Bill Nye

11 Nov

is a total fraud.

But it is an issue of epistemology. Just how does one KNOW things?

Frauds like Bill Nye rather naively think that “science” will give them truth. Nonsense. Science is a method of getting Truth, and it is very good for some things, but not so good for others. Wisdom gives you the ability to discern truth from error and when to apply certain methods and when not to. Seek for wisdom.

 
 

Yes, Milbank

31 Oct

is a jerk. But there is another, bigger, issue in play. And here it is:

Milbank hasn’t changed. He was always this way, either too stupid or to venal to stand up for what is right. Yet YOU believed and even defended him! He is the prototypical MSM hack, and he always has been. But you didn’t even know!

Next time you feel compelled to defend the MSM as a reliable source, remember this.

Be honest, YOU were snookered. So just how do you know that your current favored talking head (or general source) is telling you the truth? Dana Milbank was shown to be a turd who disregarded the truth. Dan Rather has been categorically shown to be biased. Even Walter Cronkite was quite problematic. The NY Times is regularly wrong, and the both have to make frequent corrections and are exposed by other entities.

So just how do you know you are getting the truth? What is your measure? Just why should I believe them over a dog-faced baboon? Just what ground are they standing on?

 
Comments Off on Yes, Milbank

Posted in Dog-faced Baboon, Epistemology, Media Untrustworthiness

 

Don’t kid yourself,

27 Oct

the Uranium One thing is a big deal. But perhaps as big a deal (or bigger) is how the MSM has sucked up to Hillary and bashed Trump. They are NOT reliable. They lie. They obscure the facts rather than elucidate them. They report according to their prejudices, and hide anything that doesn’t support their worldview. They are NOT reliable. Let me say that yet again–they are NOT reliable.

Only a great fool buys what they’re selling. Don’t just tell me WHAT is true, tell me how you got there.

It’s true that ALL humans are unreliable at times–that’s why one logically has to ultimately rely on a non-mortal Truth-Teller. But that is a discussion for another day…

Now the logically indefensible fall-back position of Lefties of all stripes has been, “Yeah, some of what they (the MSM) report is undeniably wrong and biased, but on the whole they do a good job.” OK, here is my question for YOU then:

If some portion of what they say is false (and some true), just how do you know what is true and what is false? What is the measure? See, now you’re getting to the famous, “I can’t define it, but I know it when I see it!” Just how do you know it?

It is the ultimate in subjectivity, and each person is the measure of all things. It is Gnosticism (special, mystic knowledge that is arrived at through supernatural methods and is only available to a few people, usually some sort of Priest). YOU are the unwashed masses, and THEY are the Priests, who tell you everything. Or, you can drown in a sea of Post-Modern know-nothingism.

Yes, there are some things such as honesty and “character” that might get you closer to actual truth (or an approximation of it), but “secular” thinkers have categorically ruled morals out of bounds (though I don’t know who made THEM the ultimate arbiters of truth).

But I am left asking, “How do you know?” Aye, there’s the rub…

 
Comments Off on Don’t kid yourself,

Posted in Epistemology, Media Untrustworthiness

 

Yeah,

20 Oct

pretty much.

Look, it’s quite clear that Trump is a competent administrator and Obama just wasn’t. Obama was a failure–he was no good at this job. Fortunately, we now have Trump, who is a real executive.

This is why you don’t ever vote for a person (if you have a choice) who has never lived off his (or her) own business. Just knowing what should happen intellectually won’t cut the mustard. Again, it’s not IQ. It is knowledge that is part and parcel of executive experience. It is the fruit of lived experience. And if you don’t have the experience, you don’t know what you don’t know.

Here’s a quote:

The result of this shift seems pretty obvious. In July, ISIS was booted from Mosul, and this week Raqqa was liberated. For all intents and purposes, ISIS has been defeated. Trump did in nine months what Obama couldn’t in the previous three years.

How do you argue with that? It is a plain fact.

 
Comments Off on Yeah,

Posted in Buffoons, Epistemology, War

 

I gotta tell you

08 Oct

I am heartily sick of the overweening, dishonest incompetence and deliberate vinductiveness of the MSM. And I am NOT fooled by them. No wonder Trump won! I blame this on them. They have made it so nothing they say is believable.  Just decide what you believe and go from there–you are NOT getting “Truth” from the MSM! They are just no help. You must look to another source for Truth. Anyone who uncritically buys what they shovel out is a damned fool.

Here’s a quote: What passes for news today is speculation and advocacy, wishful thinking and self-fashioning, mindless jabber and affirmations of virtue, removed from objective reality and common sense.

Exactly.

 
Comments Off on I gotta tell you

Posted in Epistemology, Media Bias

 

A FANTASTIC

26 Sep

set of questions and answers. I find the last one most intriguing. What a truly stunning intellect! Stunning. As he said, And yet there’s no possibility for morality unless we presume the possibility of agency. Yes.

He is totally on the money, here. Is real change possible? Not just changing forms, like from water to ice. but changing essence, like from water to gold (the ultimate goal of alchemy for thousands of years). In human (and religious) terms, is real conversion possible? See, I have to resort to religious terminology to even communicate these concepts!

Indeed, there simply IS no morality without real choice. That’s why ham-fisted biological reductionism and Post-Modern epistemology are such problems–each on the opposite end of the spectrum, but each equally in denial of moral agency (and therefore actual knowledge). Both deny the very idea of moral agency–and therefore knowledge. Because if there is change, there is no Cartesian certainty. The only way we can have Cartesian of “scientific” certainty is if the is no moral agency.

So is there a “third way” that is neither reductionistic nor mere know-nothingism that can somehow save moral agency and actual knowledge? Because historically we can either have moral agency or reliable knowledge, but not both. What I would argue is that there is a different way of knowing…

I think there is indeed a logical “third way.” In Greek terms, we go from material, formal, and efficient modes of causation to Final causation. But of course, modern scientistic thought (not “scientific” thought) eschews final causation (and rules it automatically out of bounds) because it demands an actor who, by definition, acts with free will. It demands moral agency. And because there is free will, there are some things that can be neither predicted nor controlled.

And so what I am suggesting is that we have to look to a Truth-Teller with whom we have an actual relationship in order to know things–the knowledge is relationship-based, not abstract “fact” based. In other words, I take the knowledge criticisms of the Post-Moderns seriously, as well as the assertions of the reductionists. But then I go a totally different direction–one based in a relationship rather than abstract “facts” or scientific method.

Well, I don’t want to delve too deeply into this–I may well lose my audience. More’s the pity…

 
Comments Off on A FANTASTIC

Posted in Epistemology, Racism

 

Yep,

19 Sep

pretty much.

Remember, there was a lot of mocking Trump when he complained about Obama “wiretapping” him and his organization. But I guess he was right, eh? Still, don’t expect admissions of fault or mea culpas. Say it with me, “Trump was right and the Lefty News Media was wrong.” There. That wasn’t so hard, was it? And it has the added merit of actually being true!

Apologies and self-reflection are just not in the Left’s nature (and the MSM is the Left). It’s not who they are. Don’t expect that leopard to change its spots…

But if YOU were snookered, shame on you! You should have known. Heaven knows this is not the first time the MSM has trotted out fake things and yet you bought this most recent crap hook, line, and sinker. You should have been more skeptical. Please, in the future, don’t be fooled again. There is just no excuse for it.

So what truly are the MSM? Unreliable shills. Face it, you simply can’t get the truth from those sources. Sorry, do the hard lifting yourself! They are NOT a good source of knowledge, not consistently, anyway. And if it is not consistent, by what measure do you decide that in THIS case they are telling the truth and in THAT case they are not?

That’s why historically, thinkers have postulated an unchanging and perfect world (like Plato and his world of forms) or a perfect principle or a perfect being (God). Anything short of that renders actual knowing impossible. That’s why Post-Modernism denies the very possibility of Truth or Fact or knowledge–all is mere opinion. Perhaps a bit of bad beef (to quote Charles Dickens). What may be true today is not necessarily true tomorrow. If there is a shadow of change, it cannot logically be Truth, and there’s no way to really know anything. As an old church hymn says,

  Change and decay in all around I see                                                                                                                       Oh, Thou who changest not, abide with me (written by William Henry Monk)

And also to the point in this case is this: Just because YOU believe it, why should I? What claim do YOU have on Truth? See, there has to be some “ground” upon which you are standing. So what are those grounds? What is your proof? Why do you believe what you do? And just why should I believe you over a dog-faced baboon?