Nope
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Football] Matt Le Tissier
- Thread starter Sussex Nomad
- Start date
Nope
I dont choose between them, I choose neither of them, but I group them up like that because of practical reasons as its not possible to mention every single corporate/underground media entity.
Sorry, I'm not in the whole "treat science as a God" thing. Science can be distorted and manipulated, peer reviews can be biased and corrupt. Of course science is sometimes interesting to look at, but I take it all with a pinch of salt - there is too much money in it to be the objective truthteller it might have some potential to be, it is inevitably and maliciously used as a tool to sell shit (ideas, narratives, products). But obviously there are situations when science is interesting - like when it is difficult to see anyone gain profit or power from it.
BadFish
Huge Member
- Oct 19, 2003
- 18,222
A couple of things:
1. I never said anything like "science is god", science is the process that we use to understand the world around us.
2. Everything else in your post is the critical thinking part that I mentioned.
My suggestion is this, if you use your critical thinking and analysis skills equally on each source of information then science/research/the scientific method/academia is going to yield the best results. As I said it is not perfect and as you say it can and has been misused (Shampoo companies - I'm looking at you
) and compromised but it still is the best we have.If you disagree then I challenge you to tell me something more reliable (with the caveat that you need critical thinking skills).
Last edited:
The reason the MSM - an expression I hate, incidentally - got Iraq wrong was because their main source was the government who acted on bad intelligence. Once it became clear a mistake had been made about the WMD they changed their tune. There is a world of difference between getting it wrong through incorrect information and a conspiracy to spread disinformation to the masses.
Two years ago we were all stuck at home under lockdown with the NHS under threat of collapsing and today our lives are essentially back to normal essentially because of vaccines. Putin has prievious with invading countries and human rights violations at home and abroad.
Great and important movements start underground on occasion but more often than not the obvious answer is the correct one.
Two years ago we were all stuck at home under lockdown with the NHS under threat of collapsing and today our lives are essentially back to normal essentially because of vaccines. Putin has prievious with invading countries and human rights violations at home and abroad.
Great and important movements start underground on occasion but more often than not the obvious answer is the correct one.
A couple of things:
1. I never said anything like "science is god", science is the process that we to understand the world around us.
2. Everything else in your post is the critical thinking part that I mentioned.
My suggestion is this, if you use your critical thinking and analysis skills equally on each source of information then science/research/the scientific method/academia is going to yield the best results. As I said it is not perfect and as you say it can and has been misused (Shampoo companies - I'm looking at you
If you disagree then I challenge you to tell me something more reliable (with the caveat that you need critical thinking skills).
No, I know you didnt say that. But plenty do have that perspective. In the eyes of many, many people it has replaced religion as the all-knowing force that you're supposed to swallow without chewing.
And I definitely disagree it is the best we have. We lived succesfully as a species for about 200 000 years just ****ing, dancing, gathering shit and painting cows on the wall while 500 years or so of science, in the modern sense, has put us in a really shit situation, possibly killing off the entire species. The best thing would be to throw science, information and structures under the bus and go back to our roots. Impossible of course, but still.. calling our executioner the best we have, cant agree with that. More orgies, dancing and dying, less of this trapped in offices, stigmas and addictions stuff we've put ourselvs in.
BadFish
Huge Member
- Oct 19, 2003
- 18,222
I think our definitions of science are vastly different. Let's use this from the oxford dictionary to define what I am talking about
"the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment."
Obviously, we have been doing this for far longer than 500 years. I would also argue that you are somewhat conflating the seeking of studying and understanding with the using of that understanding for selfish and nefarious means. I see this conflation as throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Your alternative for increasing our understanding appears to be "****ing, dancing and gathering shit". Surely this is the exact opposite of increasing our understanding and learning about stuff? The discussion of whether we would be better to revert back to living in ignorance is really a different one.
One observation I do have (and I concede that I do not know you) is that this avoidance of understanding is entirely inconsistent with your persona on here. From what I see you are far more of the 'enlightened, truth seeker" than the **** it I'll get pissed, dance and shag type.
Am I correct in concluding that the response to my challenge of how best we can grow our knowledge and understand the world is to ignore it and work from our base instincts*?
* Of course to do this you have to ignore the fact that one of our base instincts is to learn investigate the world around us.
I'm here while avoiding writing one
Returning to University study after a long time (Autism Studies - you may be interested to know) and lots of wheel spinning at this stage, hoping for some traction . . . any day now
Any tips?
Tips? Turn up for everything. In assessments, write what you understand and understand what you write.
And I hope you learn something to my advantage
Oh FFS Matt, I wish someone close to him would shut him up.
Genuinely a nice guy in person and one of the most talented players we’ve ever produced in this country. It makes me sad watching him over the past few years.
Genuinely a nice guy in person and one of the most talented players we’ve ever produced in this country. It makes me sad watching him over the past few years.
Plot was lost a long time ago.
Weststander
Well-known member
The internet has churned out these loons.
Watching news footage outside the ULEZ court hearing this morning, Piers Corbyn was trying to get into every TV camera shot, holding up an A4-sized sheet. Accompanied by supporters - all older middle aged blokes wearing army camouflaged clothing. You couldn't make it up.
Watching news footage outside the ULEZ court hearing this morning, Piers Corbyn was trying to get into every TV camera shot, holding up an A4-sized sheet. Accompanied by supporters - all older middle aged blokes wearing army camouflaged clothing. You couldn't make it up.
To be fair, I didn’t see it coming. I didn’t look at Rishi Sunak, Liz Truss, Boris Johnson, Jacob Rees-Mogg, Suella Braverman and Lee Anderson and even consider for a moment that they might be communists. And I bet you didn’t even.
Supremely talented footballer.
Opinionated pillock.
Opinionated pillock.
Ian Walker ?
Greg Bobkin
Silver Seagull
- May 22, 2012
- 16,062
He's recently re-launched his website, in case anyone wanted to take a look...
Baldseagull
Well-known member
Gullible or credulous fits.