dawp
Lifer
- Jul 2, 2005
- 11,347
- 2,710
- 136
I guess the political centre-of-gravity is even further to the right in the US than I thought, if Andrew Neil (a guy I've occasionally cited as an example of how stuffed-full of Thatcherite Tories the BBC's news and current affairs department is) is a US conservative's idea of a 'leftist'.
"leftist" is just literally anyone who disagrees with a "conservative" these days.
You should write a book about that!
Probably a good point, though. Ideological affiliations aside, the media is full of people hawking their dubious pet thesis to generate a revenue stream. Lots of them are on the right, of course, but it's sometimes not partisan-political, more a kind of intellectual (or pseudo-intellectual) entrepreneurship (the likes of Malcolm Gladwell or Stephen Pinker or any number of diet-or-exercise-gurus).
(One would have thought the internet would have knocked the bottom out of that market, what with so many (of us?) happy to give opinions and construct elaborate theories for free....)
zinfamous
No Lifer
- Jul 12, 2006
- 111,864
- 31,359
- 146
You leave my Benny alone!
why do you care about the guy? He's a complete moron. This is easy to see.
Mai72
Lifer
- Sep 12, 2012
- 11,562
- 1,741
- 126
Because I was joking. My real name is Ben also. Lol. Lots of people like Ben. Have you been on YT lately?
- Dec 24, 2016
- 1,217
- 1,288
- 136
UberNeuman
Lifer
- Nov 4, 1999
- 16,937
- 3,087
- 126
Just the other day he was pushing wee Ben as an intelligent conservative voice.
lol. Anyone who has seen his work knows he’s a hot head moron.
dawp
Lifer
- Jul 2, 2005
- 11,347
- 2,710
- 136
just being popular does not make you a genius, (or accurate), in fact it's more likely to show the opposite as evidenced by the popularity of 'here, hold my beer' type of videos on youtube.
Yeah to see how to fix something on my car. I sure as shit don't go to YT for political commentary or intellectual stimulation.
dank69: I do realize there are limitations, but you lost me when you inferred that I know how far everyone has progressed. That seems like a non sequitur to me so I'll need clarification.
M: You made the absolute statement that everybody rationalizes from time to time but that there is a cure for this when one sees the danger of it. This implies that nobody has ever fully realized the danger and has fully stopped doing it. In order to make those two statements factual would imply that you personally had used your understanding of the danger of rationalization to reduce your irrationality to the bare minimum possible and that, further, you also know personally that everybody else has either reduced their level of irrationality to the same point or greater if in fact nobody ever is free of it.
I am saying, then, that you are making a claim that nobody can actually logically make, leaving open the possibility that your claim that when you use words like objective reality, you might not actually be objective, but objectivity might still exist. You assume but do not really know that there are none who have seen into themselves so deeply and have become so deeply aware of the rationalization danger that they have fully awakened and I don’t know either. But I have my suspicions and they don’t seem as certain as yours.
d: If we can't observe something and can't measure it then I would argue that we don't really "know" anything about it.
M: My point was that whenever people talk about reality, they unconsciously assume that what they say they see is reality. My contention is that one can only see reality if one has no unconscious assumptions.
d: I don't have your answer for you. Venom and bile don't work. Sugar and spice doesn't work. You can't help someone that does not want to be helped. The best you can do is wait until they have their own epiphany, and understand that that epiphany may never come.
M: Indeed. But what do we do with that realization, how do we react?
My journey seems to me to have gone something like this: I used to be just a normal kin, asleep to the emotional world within me, but I begin to show symptoms that something troubling and disquieting was happening within. I began to be angry rebellious and depresses which led to deep sadness and hopelessness. Insights made possible from reading Zen literature helped me with that and via therapy I started to deal with the anger and rage. That opened the door to grief and the inner experience that it is healing. And since I feel your anger and rage I just want you to know that, that life is good and there is a road that leads up hill. Love you dank, in the small way open to me.
M: You made the absolute statement that everybody rationalizes from time to time but that there is a cure for this when one sees the danger of it. This implies that nobody has ever fully realized the danger and has fully stopped doing it. In order to make those two statements factual would imply that you personally had used your understanding of the danger of rationalization to reduce your irrationality to the bare minimum possible and that, further, you also know personally that everybody else has either reduced their level of irrationality to the same point or greater if in fact nobody ever is free of it.
I am saying, then, that you are making a claim that nobody can actually logically make, leaving open the possibility that your claim that when you use words like objective reality, you might not actually be objective, but objectivity might still exist. You assume but do not really know that there are none who have seen into themselves so deeply and have become so deeply aware of the rationalization danger that they have fully awakened and I don’t know either. But I have my suspicions and they don’t seem as certain as yours.
d: If we can't observe something and can't measure it then I would argue that we don't really "know" anything about it.
M: My point was that whenever people talk about reality, they unconsciously assume that what they say they see is reality. My contention is that one can only see reality if one has no unconscious assumptions.
d: I don't have your answer for you. Venom and bile don't work. Sugar and spice doesn't work. You can't help someone that does not want to be helped. The best you can do is wait until they have their own epiphany, and understand that that epiphany may never come.
M: Indeed. But what do we do with that realization, how do we react?
My journey seems to me to have gone something like this: I used to be just a normal kin, asleep to the emotional world within me, but I begin to show symptoms that something troubling and disquieting was happening within. I began to be angry rebellious and depresses which led to deep sadness and hopelessness. Insights made possible from reading Zen literature helped me with that and via therapy I started to deal with the anger and rage. That opened the door to grief and the inner experience that it is healing. And since I feel your anger and rage I just want you to know that, that life is good and there is a road that leads up hill. Love you dank, in the small way open to me.
At least he owned his self ownage, by admitting that he came unprepared. Some of you guys might not agree with his views, but at least he has some integrity and is true to his beliefs.
UberNeuman
Lifer
- Nov 4, 1999
- 16,937
- 3,087
- 126
Vic
Elite Member
- Jun 12, 2001
- 50,422
- 14,337
- 136
If he were true to his beliefs, then he wouldn't have reflexively attacked any questioning of his beliefs with unfounded namecalling of the questioner.
Because the only thing that really differentiates Shapiro from any other right wing talking head are his claims to being open and fair to different ideas (which he contrasts against 'leftist intolerance').
So it's hard to see his apology as anything other than regret for being exposed as a charlatan.
Amused
Elite Member
- Apr 14, 2001
- 57,387
- 19,698
- 146
Vic
Elite Member
- Jun 12, 2001
- 50,422
- 14,337
- 136
Tell ya what, Moonie, I will agree with you on this when Shapiro admits that it is medieval to threaten a woman with prison because she had a miscarriage.
Because actually being open to fairness and new ideas means not assuming some vast conspiracy of evil against you every time someone disagrees with you. It means recognizing that different people have different interests and that often those interests conflict without any malice whatsoever. And it also means understanding and accepting that the ends, regardless of how noble, rarely justify the means.
Yes, but in the interview that we witnessed, we saw Shapiro fail at an earlier stage. To know how he would react the the points you present here, we would have to see how he would react, say, were you the one arguing those points. Just how far down a philosophically focused discussion or the kind you outlined would he be able to go. I believe that in order to get to the real person one needs to establish a trust that the intention is not who gets over on who, but what is a societal, functional truth. For me that means arriving at a truth that reconciles at a higher level of understanding. That for involves the collapse of duality in a realization or awakening analogous to the notion that heads and tails are faces of the same coin.
In this world what liberals and conservatives do is argue their side is good and the other is evil and this become a habituated attitude. To break it takes time and patience and a open willingness. If we write everybody off then our situation is certainly hopeless. The first step in getting to a hopeless condition, I think, would be to demand conditions.
Since the hopeless blindness of conditioned thinking is a given, in my opinion, I start there. The situation is hopeless and humanity is lost in a state of mechanical sleep. Having cried my tears and exhausted my rage, at least to some degree, my perspective is that if I can let go of some of my sacred dreams maybe so can others. If you are resigned to hopelessness then any alternative is up.
UglyCasanova
Lifer
- Mar 25, 2001
- 19,275
- 1,361
- 126
I watched the interview and he was certainly frustrated/frazzled. The guy was throwing gotcha questions at him which was kind of lame but Shapiro should have handled himself better.
Commodus
Diamond Member
- Oct 9, 2004
- 9,215
- 6,820
- 136
The point is that Shapiro doesn't know how to handle himself better. He's the embodiment of the modern right-wing 'star,' a provocateur who pretends he's intellectually superior but proves to be nothing but a brat with a YouTube channel.
UglyCasanova
Lifer
- Mar 25, 2001
- 19,275
- 1,361
- 126
How? He was visibly flustered when this guy kept doing gotcha questions but by and large is very composed and a good debater. Picking this one interview and going "see Shapiro sucks” doesn’t make much sense.
Commodus
Diamond Member
- Oct 9, 2004
- 9,215
- 6,820
- 136
Because when you come to an interview, you're supposed to be prepared for surprises and to maintain some kind of baseline maturity. Especially if you pitch yourself as a political savant like Shapiro does.
And remember that Shapiro's MO is to either be the one conducting the interviews or to only appear on shows where he won't be seriously challenged. It's all about preserving the image, making him seem like a guru when his ideas would fall apart under real scrutiny.
(P.S. Could you please reply to everyone by using the reply/quote functions? We shouldn't have to guess whether or not you're replying to us!)
UglyCasanova
Lifer
- Mar 25, 2001
- 19,275
- 1,361
- 126
He is prepared but an interview that is just bringing up old tweets and dumb things he said as gotcha’s is rather shallow and I think anybody would be understandably frustrated. He’s been on plenty of debate panels where he wasn’t the one doing the interviewing and certainly wasn’t in what could be described as friendly company and has handled himself just fine.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter