The things they'll do.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
This Is How Fox News Brainwashes Its Viewers
- Thread starter tytlyf
- Start date
In such a left leaning forum, the OP is what passes for serious political conversation.
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
By "these guys" you mean Hillary? That's the only time I've ever heard the reference.
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
Don't be so hard on yourself.
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
You only validate the OP by responding exactly as it had predicted.
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
And what would pass for a serious political conversation in right leaning forum? That a lack of God in schools would be the cause for school shootings - that is if they weren't "false flag" hoaxes?
godnotgod
Thou art That
America was raised on myths and good bedtime stories. It is what it thrives on. We always need a new hero to perpetuate the myth. Trump is the current 'hero'. The myth says that if we don't perpetuate America The Good, we will all go to a living hell. No amount of Reason or Logic can defeat that kind of hysteria-based belief.
Kangaroo Feathers
Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...
School shootings that have stopped happening just recently? Because Trump, obviously?
Kangaroo Feathers
Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...
Really nice of all the Usual Suspects to join the thread and behave precisely as predicted by the OP. We truly have entered a post irony age.
Propaganda is a political tactic, just like articles which suggest that Fox viewers are less educated and not as smart as the intellectual giants in the Hillary camp. That's a political tactic, too, and both sides use such tactics all the time.
Oh come on, man. You make it sound like you're the only one who's ever been to college.
As for facts and evidence, it depends on which facts and which evidence. Is this evidence that you're holding in your own hands and that you personally have the expertise to examine and interpret? Or is it evidence which is being held in someone else's custody and we all have take their word for it in terms of analysis and interpretation? This is an important distinction that must be made.
You speak of critical thinking, but that also involves skepticism, reading between the lines, and an uncompromising drive to question authority.
Kangaroo Feathers
Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...
Um... I think you're getting defensive, for some reason. I was relaying may experience. I sincerely believe anyone can be taught to think critically and use evidence based practice. The fact, however, is that many people aren't and don't, and they're the people I'm talking about.
Evidence is evidence. Interpretation of evidence is somewhat subjective, but if you lack the tools to do it yourself, it's sensible to find an expert who know's what their doing. Two different people can look at the same piece of evidence and come up with different interpretations, but, and this is important, there's a huge difference between differences of interpretation, and outright misrepresentations of, evidence.
If someone is a Trump supporter based on critical thinking and evidence, hey, good for them. I may disagree with them over subjectivity, but I'll not for an instant criticise them. What I DO criticise, is the people who, for whatever reason, support Trump UN critically. My post was a comment purely about them, and my own failure to reach them.
... and?
I don't see it as being "defensive," but I'll admit that I am somewhat put off by the tired old tactic that "they disagree with us because they're not as intelligent/educated as we are." If you say that you weren't doing that, then I believe you, but then I would ask what relevance it would give to the discussion.
Political differences tend to be rooted in conflicting political philosophies and different value systems, things that can't necessarily be proven as "factual." If someone holds to a different set of values, then it doesn't mean that they're unable to understand evidence or think critically.
If you're addressing the fact that there are many ill-informed individuals out there who are unable to think critically, then one can see that phenomenon is evident all across the political spectrum, not just among Trump supporters. It's a nationwide problem.
As for evidence, it depends on what it is. If it's evidence presented in the realm of science or some other scholarly pursuit at the academic level, then it would undoubtedly undergo more rigorous scrutiny and examination - and the evidence would have to be open and accessible for all interested parties to examine.
If it's evidence in a criminal case or involving some political issue, then it gets a bit more murky, since oftentimes evidence is kept locked up and inaccessible, although both sides theoretically have the right to review and examine all the evidence in a case. This brings me to the next point which you asked me about.
The bottom line is that it's best to never take one individual's word for it - or even one news source, whether it's Fox, CNN, NYT, WaPo, WSJ. It's also the same with politicians or governmental sources - including but not limited to the CIA, FBI, NSA, Border Patrol, or even local law enforcement. Just because they say "we think this happened," it doesn't mean anyone should take it as the gospel truth, not unless they present their evidence just like anyone else would have to do. If there are those who think they should be taken on faith simply because of their job titles or the hats they wear, then that doesn't sound like critical thinking to me.
Obama sporting devil horns, dressed as a pimp, & driving his limo over a dozen orphans.
tytlyf
Not Religious
A religious forum is now left leaning? Can you tell which propaganda technique you just used?
Journalistic outlets don't have to use propaganda like Fox does
tytlyf
Not Religious
Have you ever had an IQ test?
They just call their propaganda "The Truth".
I know....I hear them claim so on NPR.
Just so you know, the monkey's antics
with the football aren't an intelligence test.