Insults, And Focus On People, Rather Than People's Ideas, Is Used To Control You

[AretnaP]

I was looking at skeptoid.com, ran by some guy named Brian Dunning (subscriber of the mainstream = good school of thought). He has a podcast titled "How to tell if somebody is a crank" or something like that. This got me thinking on something I've been thinking about for a long time, why does it matter?

If somebody's ideas are legit what good does it do to label somebody a "crank" or a "quack", and if somebody's ideas are not legit why does it matter how admired they are by everybody else?

Focus on people rather than the ideas put forth by those people will probably be one of the causes of the end of the human race.

Humans will label outsiders with insults to discourage you from thinking they have anything good to say.

 

[Tarmander]

When you cannot think about an idea's strengths or weaknesses, you have to go into a lower brain system...looking at their face, seeing if they are confident, seeing if other people believe them. They are just going to a lower level of resolution.

It is actually quite useful at times. Sometimes people are speaking about things that you know nothing about. Plus, your world is not all ideas, but is in living color. You need these lower systems.

I agree though that when there is an idea presented and people don't think about it, but use these lower systems, they are cheating themselves.

 

[Hugh Johnson]

Because it is costly to judge ideas. So if Peat or Haidut says something, I will consider it to be probably true, and if it contradict my views, I try to see if I'm wrong. This works because I have established these people as a reliable source. I do test the ideas and look up studies, but I lack the skill and energy those two have. If Lustig were to say some stuff about human health, I would just ignore the man since I think he is an idiot. He might be right but I have better things to do than consider his ideas.