The soft left summed up in under four minutes.

[zinfamous]

An objective party does not mean their decision is objective. I asked you if its objectively or subjectively sexual harassment.

so now objective doesn't mean anything? I mean, if an objective party isn't objective, then...?

 

[J.Wilkins]

so now objective doesn't mean anything? I mean, if an objective party isn't objective, then...?

Then nothing matters and all subjective opinions are equally valid as per realibrad's wishes.

Or perhaps not, perhaps he just doesn't understand the difference?

 

[Jhhnn]

So do you now agree that white people in fact face substantially less discrimination in the workplace than say, black or Hispanic people?

Also if you're a hiring manager for such a large company it is amazing to me that you are not at least aware of the general conclusions of the empirical research on hiring discrimination.

He's a Trumpian bullshit artist. I mean, it's obvious that hiring managers for fortune 500 companies are terribly oppressed, isn't it?

 

[SlowSpyder]

So do you now agree that white people in fact face substantially less discrimination in the workplace than say, black or Hispanic people?

Also if you're a hiring manager for such a large company it is amazing to me that you are not at least aware of the general conclusions of the empirical research on hiring discrimination.

I agree people of all stripes face discrimination. I do not agree that any particular group has it necessarily worse than white males as that is the only demographic that discrimination is institutionalized and pushed as some sort of morally good move.

 

[SlowSpyder]

He's a Trumpian bullshit artist. I mean, it's obvious that hiring managers for fortune 500 companies are terribly oppressed, isn't it?

Don't confuse working hard to achieve with an easy path to achieve.

 

[fskimospy]

I agree people of all stripes face discrimination. I do not agree that any particular group has it necessarily worse than white males as that is the only demographic that discrimination is institutionalized and pushed as some sort of morally good move.

So then how do you address the empirical research that shows your view is incorrect and many groups have it worse than white males?

Again, we both know you're going to ignore the research because it tells you things you don't want to hear, I just want to see the specific lies you tell yourself to avoid these uncomfortable facts.

 

[zinfamous]

Don't confuse working hard to achieve with an easy path to achieve.

Do you have this same confusion when pondering Hair Trump?

 

[realibrad]

so now objective doesn't mean anything? I mean, if an objective party isn't objective, then...?

An objective party means they are not influenced by their own personal feelings. If the alleged victim feels it is sexual harassment, and the alleged perpetrator did not intend sexual harassment, then the objective party must decide if the acts were harassment. They must, by definition, make a judgement call which cannot be objective as the call is based on personal feelings and or opinions.

I honestly did not think that the question would invoke a response like this.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Oooooo! How many is enough?!

I would say enough to win a national election is enough

 

[bshole]

You are wrong. The revolution already happened, you're on the wrong side of it.

So you're saying (if) when the Dems are in power they'll undo everything Trump has done, you sound very positive about that. So.... then I am sure you have no issues with Trump dismantling everything Obama did. Sounds like a great way to run a country.

Hope you enjoy your ruined internet. We are already behind fucking China and just about every other first world nation. This is what you wanted, an FCC run by ISPs. By the time you assclowns are done with murdering Net Neutrality, we will be lucky to have 3rd world quality at 10x the price of every other country. Love the way you shitbags are making it illegal on a state by state basis for citizens to band together for municipal broadband or allowing states to enforce Net Neutrality. Explain why you want this.

You can take your revolution and shove it up your ass. Keep looting middle class consumers and you will get your revolution, count on it.

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-s...nternet-connection-in-the-world-a6755361.html

 

[zinfamous]

An objective party means they are not influenced by their own personal feelings. If the alleged victim feels it is sexual harassment, and the alleged perpetrator did not intend sexual harassment, then the objective party must decide if the acts were harassment. They must, by definition, make a judgement call which cannot be objective as the call is based on personal feelings and or opinions.

I honestly did not think that the question would invoke a response like this.

I found the issue.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Experiences are subjectively true but empirical evidence is objectively true which means that it is actually true.

I may experience something as true that is shown to be false through empirical evidence, whether I accept it to be false or true does not change what is objectively true.

Yes, but when you take empirical evidence and apply confirmation bias or assert correlation, it becomes equally subjective.

Similarly, if I experience something as true, it is true. Changing the sample population or frame of reference does not make it any less true.

 

[realibrad]

I found the issue.

Come now, address what I said and asked.

An objective party trying to decide on subjective issues will not be able to come to an objective conclusion as by definition it would be impossible.

 

[J.Wilkins]

An objective party means they are not influenced by their own personal feelings. If the alleged victim feels it is sexual harassment, and the alleged perpetrator did not intend sexual harassment, then the objective party must decide if the acts were harassment. They must, by definition, make a judgement call which cannot be objective as the call is based on personal feelings and or opinions.

I honestly did not think that the question would invoke a response like this.

No, I can have the capacity to be objective regardless of bias. If this wasn't possible then I would NEVER be in the position I am today. When my research is falsified I welcome it as an addition to truth.

You simply cannot understand the idea of an objective party and thus, to you such a party cannot exist.

For those of us who are determined to always be in the service of truth, this is an affront.

I'd say that is your problem, I'd ascribe it to a problem you have understanding others and I do not mean this as an insult in any way but you might suffer from some degree of autism.

 

[bshole]

Yes, but when you take empirical evidence and apply confirmation bias or assert correlation, it becomes equally subjective.

Similarly, if I experience something as true, it is true. Changing the sample population or frame of reference does not make it any less true.

Republicans are poised to do more damage to this country in a single month than any decade in my lifetime and this is how they defend it...... there is no such thing as truth. Absolutely pathetic.

When they have ruined the budget with their plan, the next shoe will be gutting medicaid/medicare/social security to pay for the mounting deficits. The ruining of the budget is only the first part of their plan. Bank on it.

 

[J.Wilkins]

Yes, but when you take empirical evidence and apply confirmation bias or assert correlation, it becomes equally subjective.

Similarly, if I experience something as true, it is true. Changing the sample population or frame of reference does not make it any less true.

Empirical evidence are as they are. The way evidence is used is either as is or as a greater point. To imply correlation is mostly fine in almost every case and in almost every single case it does imply causation since a strong correlation is the only one ever presented (weak correlations are never published) and allows us to continue researching the actual function.

Empirical evidence is always objective regardless of bias or assertion of correlations, the evidence stands or falls on its own and your attempt of dismissal IS the subjective claim that objective reality is in fact, not real.

 

[jackstar7]

I would say enough to win a national election is enough

Wait, so when the minority of the majority says they're treated like a minority that should just be accepted?

That's amazing.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Republicans are poised to do more damage to this country in a single month than any decade in my lifetime and this is how they defend it...... there is no such thing as truth. Absolutely pathetic.

When they have ruined the budget with their plan, the next shoe will be gutting medicaid/medicare/social security to pay for the mounting deficits. The ruining of the budget is only the first part of their plan. Bank on it.

What is the end game?

 

[J.Wilkins]

Wait, so when the minority of the majority says they're treated like a minority that should just be accepted?

That's amazing.

WHAT have you learned from this?

 

[jackstar7]

What is the end game?

Same as it's always been: consolidated power and wealth in the hands of the few. If those hands can all be white that makes them feel much more calm about it, too.

 

[J.Wilkins]

What is the end game?

Money and influence. You did know that, right?

 

[jackstar7]

WHAT have you learned from this?

Ol' Starbuck is just doing his job. He's got a bubble to protect.

I don't blame the bull for charging either.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Wait, so when the minority of the majority says they're treated like a minority that should just be accepted?

That's amazing.

No, when enough people feel abandoned and disenfranchised, they will vote for the candidate that validates or acknowledges what they perceive as the root cause of their frustration.

What is amazing is that Democrats still don't understand why they lost.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Empirical evidence are as they are. The way evidence is used is either as is or as a greater point. To imply correlation is mostly fine in almost every case and in almost every single case it does imply causation since a strong correlation is the only one ever presented (weak correlations are never published) and allows us to continue researching the actual function.

Empirical evidence is always objective regardless of bias or assertion of correlations, the evidence stands or falls on its own and your attempt of dismissal IS the subjective claim that objective reality is in fact, not real.

The whole notion of privilege is not empirical, its a matter of perspective.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Money and influence. You did know that, right?

That seems rather cliche