Skepticism and politics

[Unveiled Artist]

We can be skeptics about our religious practices-which is supposed to define your life, your facts, your truth-but not political decisions and not world events. Does our observations and personal experiences blind us from being skeptics in what we see, read, hear, and even what we experience?

COVID is not a political thing, of course. But do people really think about the situation before jumping to conclusions about these things? Not the validity of COVID's existence and certainty not the harm it is doing to people-that's irrelevant. Do you question (as in religion) or do you accept what you are presented with no matter how scientific it is?

I've been a skeptic all my life about things-religion and otherwise-so that's not a new "condition" for me. So, be mindful skepticism (looking into what's questionable) isn't the issue but one's behaviors that could or could not be influenced by skepticism (and beliefs and what we take in as facts).

Do you know what your confirmed biases are?

I know by nature fallacies can be overlooked for Me As Well. Though, psychologically do we ever wonder about things like this or take it as is based on our personal experiences and information we take in as true?

Kind of like asking do believers to question their belief in god. Many say no. They probably feel uncomfortable doing so. Why does this only apply to religion?

 

[ChristineM]

COVID is not a political thing,

As i have informed you before, politicians like Trump and Johnson have made it political

 

[Unveiled Artist]

As i have informed you before, politicians like Trump and Johnson have made it political

I didn't corner this at you in the OP. It's specific to skepticism and should we not look more into what we hear, see, and read before taking things verbatim as is. We do this with religion but not with other things based on our personal experiences, our biases, and so forth.

"Our" meaning me, you, and the rest of the population. I'm not a victim to this and this has nothing to do with anyone in particular. Don't make an argument where none exists.

 

[Altfish]

I didn't corner this at you in the OP. It's specific to skepticism and should we not look more into what we hear, see, and read before taking things verbatim as is. We do this with religion but not with other things based on our personal experiences, our biases, and so forth.

"Our" meaning me, you, and the rest of the population. I'm not a victim to this and this has nothing to do with anyone in particular. Don't make an argument where none exists.

I'm not sure that is correct as far as this relates to politics.
In an election I look at the headline issues in party manifestos - I then make a choice.
I know if I read something in (say) the Daily Mail it will have a right wing, anti-NHS, anti-BBC bias; if I read something in the Guardian it will lean left.
I am suspicious of everything I read on Twitter, Facebook, etc.

 

[SomeRandom]

I didn't corner this at you in the OP. It's specific to skepticism and should we not look more into what we hear, see, and read before taking things verbatim as is. We do this with religion but not with other things based on our personal experiences, our biases, and so forth.

"Our" meaning me, you, and the rest of the population. I'm not a victim to this and this has nothing to do with anyone in particular. Don't make an argument where none exists.

The US has millions of cases. And is being lauded as irresponsible and largely selfish worldwide, as far as I can tell, as people are allegedly ignoring travel “bans” for thanksgiving. Because killing grandma is freedom I guess. I dunno. Australia with its strict lockdown procedures is now reopening (perhaps prematurely) because many states haven’t had a new case in like three weeks.
If I were to examine the evidence I would have no choice but to come to the conclusion that taking a pandemic seriously is the way to go

 

[ChristineM]

I didn't corner this at you in the OP. It's specific to skepticism and should we not look more into what we hear, see, and read before taking things verbatim as is. We do this with religion but not with other things based on our personal experiences, our biases, and so forth.

"Our" meaning me, you, and the rest of the population. I'm not a victim to this and this has nothing to do with anyone in particular. Don't make an argument where none exists.

i don't care who you aimed at, i do care about evidence and scepticism does not change the evidence

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I'm not sure that is correct as far as this relates to politics.
In an election I look at the headline issues in party manifestos - I then make a choice.
I know if I read something in (say) the Daily Mail it will have a right wing, anti-NHS, anti-BBC bias; if I read something in the Guardian it will lean left.
I am suspicious of everything I read on Twitter, Facebook, etc.

How can you tell if they're not biased?

I know in another thread, a member gave scientific information on a christian website. The scientific information may or may not have been true but it can or most likely shaped to lean towards christian values rather than a neutral position. In things like Trump, I wouldn't be surprised if news stations shifted from Trump rather than neutral. Even in the presidential debates (the first one), little comments were made against Trump which could have been kept to the moderator's thoughts.

 

[Stevicus]

We can be skeptics about our religious practices-which is supposed to define your life, your facts, your truth-but not political decisions and not world events. Does our observations and personal experiences blind us from being skeptics in what we see, read, hear, and even what we experience?

COVID is not a political thing, of course. But do people really think about the situation before jumping to conclusions about these things? Not the validity of COVID's existence and certainty not the harm it is doing to people-that's irrelevant. Do you question (as in religion) or do you accept what you are presented with no matter how scientific it is?

I've been a skeptic all my life about things-religion and otherwise-so that's not a new "condition" for me. So, be mindful skepticism (looking into what's questionable) isn't the issue but one's behaviors that could or could not be influenced by skepticism (and beliefs and what we take in as facts).

Do you know what your confirmed biases are?

I know by nature fallacies can be overlooked for Me As Well. Though, psychologically do we ever wonder about things like this or take it as is based on our personal experiences and information we take in as true?

Kind of like asking do believers to question their belief in god. Many say no. They probably feel uncomfortable doing so. Why does this only apply to religion?

I suppose I'm probably more skeptical about things, particularly when it comes to politics, but also when it comes to advertising and any situation where someone has their hand out asking for money.

When it comes to scientific presentations, I guess that would also depend on the context and the circumstances. If some guy on a TV commercial comes on and says "Scientists have discovered this new wonder drug which will cure all your ailments," then my skepticism meter will go up. They may not say which scientists or what kind of scientists they are, but if they just say "scientists say," it seems to add credibility to whatever product someone is hawking.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

The US has millions of cases. And is being lauded as irresponsible and largely selfish worldwide, as far as I can tell, as people are allegedly ignoring travel “bans” for thanksgiving. Because killing grandma is freedom I guess. I dunno. Australia with its strict lockdown procedures is now reopening (perhaps prematurely) because many states haven’t had a new case in like three weeks.
If I were to examine the evidence I would have no choice but to come to the conclusion that taking a pandemic seriously is the way to go

I think it's a better safe than sorry more so than if you don't do X you "will" kill your grandmother. I guess the risk is higher if the grandmother were sick, of course. But it is interesting about the resistance in following orders. I don't think for an instance they don't care about other people. People are attacking "freedom of choice" people as if they Will kill others not put others at risk. So, the attitude doesn't reflect the nature of the situation. For example, if we read in WHO about transmission of disease, one would have to be close to another in order to spread it (have high risk of catching it and even more so developing complications from it).

But, for example, not wearing masks say in the car or walking by themselves, people still get upset. It's political on both sides unfortunately.

But in respects to the OP, like religion, I think we read and taken in what we want to take in. Case in point I posted a CDC resources months back to a person I was debating with. She said she didn't read CDC but WHO.

They both had the same information. So, I think there's a lot of bias involved, no?

 

[Altfish]

How can you tell if they're not biased?

I know in another thread, a member gave scientific information on a christian website. The scientific information may or may not have been true but it can or most likely shaped to lean towards christian values rather than a neutral position. In things like Trump, I wouldn't be surprised if news stations shifted from Trump rather than neutral. Even in the presidential debates (the first one), little comments were made against Trump which could have been kept to the moderator's thoughts.

I've said, I KNOW THEY ARE BIASED, so I allow for that.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I've said, I KNOW THEY ARE BIASED, so I allow for that.

No need to caps. Just making my own comment not devaluing yours.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

i don't care who you aimed at, i do care about evidence and scepticism does not change the evidence

Okay.... No one is sayin' you're wrong, so you don't need to make an argument over it.

 

[ChristineM]

Okay.... No one is sayin' you're wrong, so you don't need to make an argument over it.

Who is arguing? I am stating fact

 

[sun rise]

Do you know what your confirmed biases are?

Good question because it's asking for self-reflection. It asks for situations where I have no clear evidence just intellectual belief and emotional bias.

For me, there's fun ones such as dogs are better than cats for my definition of 'better', of course.

Then there are technical ones such as linux is better than Windows. (People can fling arguments around to confirm their belief.)

My political ones involve my belief that Trump and his minions are in fact truly guilty of treason in spite of there not having been a court case where they are convicted.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Who is arguing? I am stating fact

Who is disagreeing with you?

 

[ChristineM]

Who is disagreeing with you?

You wrote the OP.

COVID is not a political thing

Nuf said

 

[Unveiled Artist]

You wrote the OP.

You're making this personally. It is not.

Nuf said

This was said by Shadow in the other thread (COVID isn't political). People "think" COVID is all political and it is not.

I said COVID (the actual spreading of the illness and seriousness of it) is not political.

The argument around it
-for and against-is political.

I agreed with all of you.

So, what's the hostility?

Christine, cut it.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Good question because it's asking for self-reflection. It asks for situations where I have no clear evidence just intellectual belief and emotional bias.

For me, there's fun ones such as dogs are better than cats for my definition of 'better', of course.

Then there are technical ones such as linux is better than Windows. (People can fling arguments around to confirm their belief.)

My political ones involve my belief that Trump and his minions are in fact truly guilty of treason in spite of there not having been a court case where they are convicted.

Thank you so much for getting my point in the OP. Politics get people argumentative and defensive where there is no need to be. (Religion and politics).

It does take self-reflection. When I was in college, I was the same way. We had an earthquake in VA/US (which never happened all I remember). Everyone ran out of the building. I was at the basement of another building and felt nothing. When I came out, people were holding hands praying, sign language interpreters present too. I just stared-not scared or anything.

I came home and thought that weird. If the resurrection happened, I'd probably stand back in shock of people running up to jesus. Even on that note, when at Church I see people praying as a large group, it always got me uncomfortable.

Not sure why, though. Self-reflection can be taken for granted if something more serious/immediate and you needed to make a life/death decision immediately. Other times it relieves friction to step back and think so frictions won't happen.

 

[ChristineM]

You're making this personally. It is not.



This was said by Shadow in the other thread (COVID isn't political). People "think" COVID is all political and it is not.

I said COVID (the actual spreading of the illness and seriousness of it) is not political.

The argument around it
-for and against-is political.

I agreed with all of you.

So, what's the hostility?

Christine, cut it.

How is you writing an OP personal on my part?

I am not reply to @Shadow Wolf, i am commenting on something you have written "twice"

No hostility, i think you are imagining things.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

How is you writing an OP personal on my part?

You're bringing up something you take personal in a thread that's totally objective. It's literally not about you.

"As i have informed you before, politicians like Trump and Johnson have made it political."

Christine, you couldn't have "informed me before" on this thread unless you are taking something you dislike in another conversation and applying it here. It is literally not personal.

If you would have taken the "I informed you before" it would make more objective sense. Whatever reason you added this has nothing to do with the OP...

So Cut it.