Controversial General Political Discussion
- Thread starter AL sama
- Start date
- Tags #freepalestine are you having fun al? are you having van al? dei must go gaolang > your fav is not paying tax sexist is van having fun al? life goal sister harem loli real madrid reloaded is innocent tax is the best thing ever happened to us trans rights = human rights trans women are not interested in any of you weebs discussing politics lmao worst thread ever
Oh no, trust me, not irrelevant at all.
science without politic can become simply unethical or bias, I gave you three clear examples but I could also give you the example of animal testing of even, even darker, unrestricted development of nuclear technologies.
Science can exist without politic, but there is high chance that it can be used badly or even, done badly.
Science simply CAN'T avoid biases. Simply because science is made by humans. Even in the case of review it can't avoid them.
Plus, politic is not necessaraly synonymous of bias, it can also reorganize the mind to think more clearly about a subject. Sociology is one of the examples.
No no, its a liberal mindset that think that science must be apolitic. Its one of the reason in fact why a lot of sceptics are drifting toward the conservative right wing.
The goal is not to put science under political domination, but just to bring enough politic for science not to lose itself.
science without politic can become simply unethical or bias, I gave you three clear examples but I could also give you the example of animal testing of even, even darker, unrestricted development of nuclear technologies.
Science can exist without politic, but there is high chance that it can be used badly or even, done badly.
Science simply CAN'T avoid biases. Simply because science is made by humans. Even in the case of review it can't avoid them.
Plus, politic is not necessaraly synonymous of bias, it can also reorganize the mind to think more clearly about a subject. Sociology is one of the examples.
No no, its a liberal mindset that think that science must be apolitic. Its one of the reason in fact why a lot of sceptics are drifting toward the conservative right wing.
The goal is not to put science under political domination, but just to bring enough politic for science not to lose itself.
Or it will be done badly or unethically because politics influence it. Yknow, politics can be bad as well.
Disagree to an extent. Of course humans are biased. Science as a self-improving method with repeatable findings reduces how much bias fucks with the findings though.
Throwing ideology into the mix is counter productive
Post automatically merged:
Disagree to an extent. Of course humans are biased. Science as a self-improving method with repeatable findings reduces how much bias fucks with the findings though.
Throwing ideology into the mix is counter productive
Last edited:
No. Apolitical peeps also think science should be apolitical. Science enthusiasts of varying ideologies think science should be apolitical.
This sounds like one of your takes that is over sinplified, black and white bs
Lul. I doubt that this is rare compared to "good politics" influencing science. Politicsl correctness also shouldnt influence science
This sounds like one of your takes that is over sinplified, black and white bs
Post automatically merged:
Lul. I doubt that this is rare compared to "good politics" influencing science. Politicsl correctness also shouldnt influence science
Yes, my point exactly. Most liberals are apolitical or more exactly, most apolitical are liberals.
Which would be a very huge mistake.
Note that including politic into science doesn't mean that science should take a side between leftist and conservatist, just that science should be aware and take into consideration the political change of society to take them into account when needed in the scientific process, such as taking more women's voice into account.
This is what more politic in science means.
On the contrary, manichenism in that context would be to consider science as something that can't be influenced. But in reality, science just like human can be highly biased.
There is no such thing as political correctness in this debate. We are talking about the importance of taking into account political progress in order for science to be less bias with reality and make better and less unethical researches.
Which would be a very huge mistake.
Note that including politic into science doesn't mean that science should take a side between leftist and conservatist, just that science should be aware and take into consideration the political change of society to take them into account when needed in the scientific process, such as taking more women's voice into account.
This is what more politic in science means.
On the contrary, manichenism in that context would be to consider science as something that can't be influenced. But in reality, science just like human can be highly biased.
There is no such thing as political correctness in this debate. We are talking about the importance of taking into account political progress in order for science to be less bias with reality and make better and less unethical researches.
femmism is such a clearly idealogical thing rather then a fact
such as the inconsistent remarks on the nature of it
if it's about empowering women as compared to men, giving them more power and knocking down patriarchy then putting women in power instead of men then that aint equality
that's supremacy, if it's a solid fact as indicated by data or observable phenanon then there should be zero contradiction as that's how the law of non contradiction works
you cant say both evolution occurs by process of natural selection and then also suggest that some deity created everything as it exists today by some form of magic, those are mutually exclusive statements just as knocking down those toxic pigs is a direct contradiction to saying let's all just be equal
and suppose we all buy into the suggestion that these femminists are just altruistic nice people who just want things fair
im sorry so if you think that then where's the protest over men paying for dates, that's not equal wouldt equality mean both pay 50/50 not 100% of the burden put on men
and where's the protest for women being allowed to show emotions where a man not
if the notion was truly as the preachers say and femminism cared about everybody then these people wouldt spend all day on twitter bashing men.
what's really more likely that women made a group centered around women to gain personal power by virtue of collective might
like how every group has, gays,blacks,whites,trans or whatever
or that they are just nice happy people who love everyone and just want a more fair and just society
science is a valid thing exactly due to it's lack of poltics
if a bunch of leftists do a study on leftist idea then they gonna publish it promoting their personal belief system as ofc they are
that's the belief system they hold, same is true if you have right wingers doing all the reseach like if we just boil down studies to whatever group can better push it's idealogy then science as a idea no longer has any meaning to me
science can be universal cause it's not appealing to some personal belief, it's going based on data not on the personal feelings of the author
the scientific method includes testing your hypothesis for the exact reason that it dont turn into a propoganda mill
however ofc having it be a propoganda mill for your personal beliefs would be fine by you for the simple fact thereof
you wanna beat those right wingers, who cares about intergreity or facts so long as my side wins
i want to win
WIN WIN
literal child mentailty
it's the same shit that happened to the news, their vechicles for whatever idealogy no longer being about facts
fox for pushing right wing and cnn for pushing left.
want science to be as well regarded as news organzations which are blatant potitical idealogues
such as the inconsistent remarks on the nature of it
if it's about empowering women as compared to men, giving them more power and knocking down patriarchy then putting women in power instead of men then that aint equality
that's supremacy, if it's a solid fact as indicated by data or observable phenanon then there should be zero contradiction as that's how the law of non contradiction works
you cant say both evolution occurs by process of natural selection and then also suggest that some deity created everything as it exists today by some form of magic, those are mutually exclusive statements just as knocking down those toxic pigs is a direct contradiction to saying let's all just be equal
and suppose we all buy into the suggestion that these femminists are just altruistic nice people who just want things fair
im sorry so if you think that then where's the protest over men paying for dates, that's not equal wouldt equality mean both pay 50/50 not 100% of the burden put on men
and where's the protest for women being allowed to show emotions where a man not
if the notion was truly as the preachers say and femminism cared about everybody then these people wouldt spend all day on twitter bashing men.
what's really more likely that women made a group centered around women to gain personal power by virtue of collective might
like how every group has, gays,blacks,whites,trans or whatever
or that they are just nice happy people who love everyone and just want a more fair and just society
Post automatically merged:
science is a valid thing exactly due to it's lack of poltics
if a bunch of leftists do a study on leftist idea then they gonna publish it promoting their personal belief system as ofc they are
that's the belief system they hold, same is true if you have right wingers doing all the reseach like if we just boil down studies to whatever group can better push it's idealogy then science as a idea no longer has any meaning to me
science can be universal cause it's not appealing to some personal belief, it's going based on data not on the personal feelings of the author
the scientific method includes testing your hypothesis for the exact reason that it dont turn into a propoganda mill
however ofc having it be a propoganda mill for your personal beliefs would be fine by you for the simple fact thereof
you wanna beat those right wingers, who cares about intergreity or facts so long as my side wins
i want to win
WIN WIN
literal child mentailty
it's the same shit that happened to the news, their vechicles for whatever idealogy no longer being about facts
fox for pushing right wing and cnn for pushing left.
want science to be as well regarded as news organzations which are blatant potitical idealogues
Last edited:
left's idea of race is beyond dumb
okay so they gotta protect blacks and to a lesser degree latins cause they have racism done to them or whatever
insert whatever past tredgy to justify any special status they are given in the mainstream status quo
why dont you liberals protect asians,native americans and jews????
i mean they all have historical treadgy and still experience racism unless your gonna deny lived expericeces of those groups which would make you a hypocrite??
dont even get why there's such this focus on how blacks had slavery done them and that was bad so we should feel sorry for them cause generation trauma or some shit
im irish and jew d boy is well a jew. is that user still even here? idk anyways point being our ancestors both were slaves does not kinda make the opresssed narrative kinda bs
im also native american so yea spainards conquered my family's native land and killed any number of my distant relatives long ago along with some of my ancestors
point with this being, having a game over who's family suffered more is kinda dumb cause nearly every group had some wrongdoing occuring to them at some point.
trying to divide people between on notions of opressor vs opressed is just dumb, most people who are white wouldt agree with the sins of their father and holding them accountable for that is not fair besides if you gonna use that logic then we should hate africans cause they were the ones who sold the slaves in the first place?
my great great grandfather burned jews dead bodies in the ovens should my entire family myself be treated badly cause of some wrongdoing my ancestor did
it's not a remotely fair and logical judgement but these leftists insist on suggesting white people bad opressors and then by proxy blacks are the rightous good people.
it's as dogmatic and idealogical as the difference between heathens and worshippers of whatever insert deity
plus here's a little question if somebody is mixed race ie black mom/white dad or vice versa then does that mean the person opresses themself afterall they are both black and white
if white = evil opressor
and black = righteous vitchim
does that make mixed race kid, a vitchim of himself??
plus if reperations were given does that include mixed race people if not then arent you just executing a racial purity test on who's black enough for you or who's not. it's unironically more racist then anything the liberals accuse the right wingers of doing
the goal was always power
femmisism started as a group to give women more power
so as the generations went on and women got more & more power what once was trying to get voting rights now boils down to help me manspaining or manspreading
as quality of life became better and better, it just so happened that the issues had to become smaller scale then just being allowed to have a job mind you alot of women opposed this at the time and still to this day so im not even getting the point in this regard
still want men to provide for you but still want a job on the side for your own diposeble income or in alot of cases just screw working all together have the evil help man help ya
tbh would of just liked if women couldt work, they want men to provide them with shit anyway so not even seeing the difffernce besides in one case, she's choosing to be a parasite and in the other at least she's forced to be one
and yes women are parasites if you have a job of your own and you pitch in whatever money you make for bills then yea your not a parasite, im talking those women who want a guy to provide for them whilie not offering anything in return
besides sir, there was plenty of first wave femminists who were just fine with how things are going so stop trying to serperate the two groups like they so different
Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a first wave femminist is just fine with third wave femminism
there are some useful idiots who didt get the memo of it being a suprecist movement but they are by far a miniority and mind you were never figureheads to begin with
okay so they gotta protect blacks and to a lesser degree latins cause they have racism done to them or whatever
insert whatever past tredgy to justify any special status they are given in the mainstream status quo
why dont you liberals protect asians,native americans and jews????
i mean they all have historical treadgy and still experience racism unless your gonna deny lived expericeces of those groups which would make you a hypocrite??
dont even get why there's such this focus on how blacks had slavery done them and that was bad so we should feel sorry for them cause generation trauma or some shit
im irish and jew d boy is well a jew. is that user still even here? idk anyways point being our ancestors both were slaves does not kinda make the opresssed narrative kinda bs
im also native american so yea spainards conquered my family's native land and killed any number of my distant relatives long ago along with some of my ancestors
point with this being, having a game over who's family suffered more is kinda dumb cause nearly every group had some wrongdoing occuring to them at some point.
trying to divide people between on notions of opressor vs opressed is just dumb, most people who are white wouldt agree with the sins of their father and holding them accountable for that is not fair besides if you gonna use that logic then we should hate africans cause they were the ones who sold the slaves in the first place?
my great great grandfather burned jews dead bodies in the ovens should my entire family myself be treated badly cause of some wrongdoing my ancestor did
it's not a remotely fair and logical judgement but these leftists insist on suggesting white people bad opressors and then by proxy blacks are the rightous good people.
it's as dogmatic and idealogical as the difference between heathens and worshippers of whatever insert deity
plus here's a little question if somebody is mixed race ie black mom/white dad or vice versa then does that mean the person opresses themself afterall they are both black and white
if white = evil opressor
and black = righteous vitchim
does that make mixed race kid, a vitchim of himself??
plus if reperations were given does that include mixed race people if not then arent you just executing a racial purity test on who's black enough for you or who's not. it's unironically more racist then anything the liberals accuse the right wingers of doing
Post automatically merged:
the goal was always power
femmisism started as a group to give women more power
so as the generations went on and women got more & more power what once was trying to get voting rights now boils down to help me manspaining or manspreading
as quality of life became better and better, it just so happened that the issues had to become smaller scale then just being allowed to have a job mind you alot of women opposed this at the time and still to this day so im not even getting the point in this regard
still want men to provide for you but still want a job on the side for your own diposeble income or in alot of cases just screw working all together have the evil help man help ya
tbh would of just liked if women couldt work, they want men to provide them with shit anyway so not even seeing the difffernce besides in one case, she's choosing to be a parasite and in the other at least she's forced to be one
and yes women are parasites if you have a job of your own and you pitch in whatever money you make for bills then yea your not a parasite, im talking those women who want a guy to provide for them whilie not offering anything in return
besides sir, there was plenty of first wave femminists who were just fine with how things are going so stop trying to serperate the two groups like they so different
Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a first wave femminist is just fine with third wave femminism
there are some useful idiots who didt get the memo of it being a suprecist movement but they are by far a miniority and mind you were never figureheads to begin with
Last edited:
