The Political Thread

[JayzusB.Christ]

I didn't think it was, JBC - you are a proper gent.

I am trying to tone it down from past rabidities - how am I doing?

I did notice - fair play

[Funt Solo]

"Tin-foil-hat" is just a thought-stopper label, like "conspiracy theorist" or "Tory." They're like big signs with DO NOT THINK ABOUT written on them nailed to ideas.

Coming full circle, then: I agree with you that labeling something doesn't necessarily make it the thing you're labeling it. Really, this is regardless of label.

But I still disagree that the labels you list are "just a thought-stopper". They could be, depending on context.

On balance, by the time something has earned the sobriquet of "conspiracy theory", then (again, on balance), it's probably bullshit. We could speak to cases, but...

[The Legendary Shark]

But I still disagree that the labels you list are "just a thought-stopper". They could be, depending on context.

The context was a question about whether thinking about a certain subject was tin-foil-hattery (later amended to wrong). My position was, in this instance, that the (derogatory) label attached to such thinking was irrelevant, 'just a thought-stopper' used by lazy rhetoricicians (?) to distract the less thoughtful. In this intended context, I believe calling these labels "just thought-stoppers" is justified.

[Funt Solo]

I see how you were applying your thinking in context for the particular term "tin-foil-hattery". I don't agree with your general expansion to the other terms. I also don't see how it's a derogatory term. I see it as descriptive.

It's generally understood that the fictional person wearing the tin foil hat is not at home to reason, but rather a credulous individual willing to believe information that excites them, regardless of things like scientific method or peer-reviewed references, or easy to grasp common sense structures like Occam's terribly sharp thingy.

[JayzusB.Christ]

The context was a question about whether thinking about a certain subject was tin-foil-hattery (later amended to wrong)
[/quote]

I may be getting crossed wires here, but the concept I amended from 'tin-foil-hattish' to 'wrong' was not the act of thinking about a certain subject - it was adopting the belief that an idea was true despite all credible evidence showing that it isn't.  In fact, I believe I said it was necessary to examine opposing views.

[The Legendary Shark]

I think that this can be expanded to other terms if the context remains intact. If, say, Paul Merton calls someone a "conspiracy theorist" on Have I Got News For You then we can all have a good laugh but if Jeremy Paxman does it on Newsnight it's taken far more seriously, in a negative way. It shouldn't matter whether Merton or Paxman uses the label, it's the information that's important - if that information makes sense, fine - integrate it. If it doesn't, then that's fine too - file it away under "probably wrong.".

I think I noted earlier that most labels can be applied in a derogatory way. Tin-foil-hattery can just as easily be used in a comedic context, a mental health context, even a loving context - but it seems to me that such labels are widely regarded as negative and derogatory.

I think you hit the nail on the head describing the tin-foil-hat wearer as fictional. It's a stereotype, one of countless others from history (Commies, Gooks, Huns, Frogs, Kerrymen, immigrants, asylum seekers, etc., etc., etc.) designed to dehumanize the different and simplify complex arguments and situations.

And yeah - Occam's Razor is a terribly useful thingy but should never be put aside in favour of Occam's Scythe.

[Funt Solo]

designed to dehumanize the different and simplify complex arguments and situations

FTFM (Fixed That For Me)

I don't think describing someone who's deluded as deluded is dehumanizing, rather than just descriptive. Sometimes it's helpful to be able to shorthand complex ideas, so that they're more easily transmittable.

[JayzusB.Christ]

I think you hit the nail on the head describing the tin-foil-hat wearer as fictional. It's a stereotype, one of countless others from history (Commies, Gooks, Huns, Frogs, Kerrymen, immigrants, asylum seekers, etc., etc., etc.) designed to dehumanize the different and simplify complex arguments and situations.

I'd argue that the only one there that fits the simile is Commie - The tin-foil-hat thing is about a person's ideas and beliefs, not their race or nationality.  There are many that would call me a snowflake or cuck for my liberal ideology - whereas I don't like the alt-right (their own label) culture that has come up with these anti-liberal insults, I don't see them as being in any way similar to a xenophobe calling me a Paddy or a Mick (though it was generally a Brit, growing up with an English mother in 80s Ireland).

[Funt Solo]

Also, am I being tin-foil-hattish to think that a BLM crowd would be crushed by the police a lot more violently than a crowd of gun-toting white supremacists were?

Getting away from linguistic semantics and back to the question - I've noticed as the day has moved along that you're not alone in your thinking - with Biden repeating the point that BLM protesters were treated very differently.

There's a lot of evidence coming out now that, even ignoring the lack of readiness (itself probably swayed by the make up of the expected crowd), the way the rioters were treated when the Capital was re-secured speaks to a certain level of camaraderie between security staff and rioters.  Some had the doors held open for them as they were allowed to leave - rather than be arrested.

Certainly, it's complicated, though. Some police obviously in fear for their own safety. This video is chilling. (Another bit of uncomfortable race-obvious viewing.)

[JayzusB.Christ]

Also, am I being tin-foil-hattish to think that a BLM crowd would be crushed by the police a lot more violently than a crowd of gun-toting white supremacists were?

Getting away from linguistic semantics and back to the question - I've noticed as the day has moved along that you're not alone in your thinking - with Biden repeating the point that BLM protesters were treated very differently.

There's a lot of evidence coming out now that, even ignoring the lack of readiness (itself probably swayed by the make up of the expected crowd), the way the rioters were treated when the Capital was re-secured speaks to a certain level of camaraderie between security staff and rioters.  Some had the doors held open for them as they were allowed to leave - rather than be arrested.

Certainly, it's complicated, though. Some police obviously in fear for their own safety. This video is chilling. (Another bit of uncomfortable race-obvious viewing.)

Oh yeah, I'd heard about that video, but hadn't seen it till now - it is fairly terrifying.  I'm seeing more and more comments (why can't I stop reading them?) along the lines of 'Oh, so it's ok when the BLM protestors burn buildings and loot shops'?  No, you binary-minded oafs, it isn't, and this isn't alright either. 

[The Legendary Shark]

JBC - I simply used your statement as a starting point for a discussion about labels which can deter thinking - I mentioned your amendment to acknowledge the fact that the point I was trying to make wasn't the point you were trying to make.

I agree, generally speaking, that to believe in something like the flat earth in spite of all the evidence is perverse but I don't think it's particularly dangerous or worth wasting anger on (not that I'm saying you do). File it away under "probably wrong" and don't lose any sleep over it but also don't be afraid to take the arguments seriously until they've been examined and evaluated (not that I'm saying you don't). After all, one never knows when studying a "wrong" idea will provide deeper understanding of the "right" idea or lead to a new idea altogether.

Which is why I agree with you that it's necessary to examine as many views as possible.

[JayzusB.Christ]

 

and don't lose any sleep over it

We're in agreement, except for this point.  When ideas that are probably wrong start causing real world harm, then I genuinely do lose sleep - again, none of these are directed at you, but I find it deeply disturbing that lives have already been lost - and that the USA could be headed for civil war - because people believe the almost-certainly-wrong idea that the election was fraudulent. It negatively affects my state of mind too when millions of people are dying because of the very-probably-wrong idea that the pandemic either doesn't exist or is harmless, or that future generations could live in a devastated wasteland because not enough believe the almost-definitely true idea that we are not treating the planet properly.  So you'll forgive me if can't help losing sleep over such worries.

[The Legendary Shark]

JBC (Pt II), I don't think there is any difference between social and racial stereotypes. They're both like cheap pies, filled with a few standard ingredients, topped off with an unattractive crust, and then half-baked.

In my view, stereotypes of any kind can only be of minimal use as they conflate complex human beings and complex human notions into a palatable and easily digestible mush. One can never understand a cow by studying a steak and kidney pie.

Damn.

Now I've gone and got me the munchies...

[The Legendary Shark]

JBC (Pt III), sorry - I have no right to tell you what to lose sleep over and what not to.

I meant no disrespect - I guess I was just projecting the fact that I don't lose any sleep over these things. I do, of course, lose sleep over other things.

[JayzusB.Christ]

No bother at all, I didn't take offence - was just stating my own view.