"These are newly indoctrinated leftists, they think the rest of the world is wrong, ignorant and stupid"
Sorry, but that's a just as foolish assumption as whenever someone throw insults for disagreement. If one considers the whole left to be as such, and ignores the variety of intellectuals on that wing, then there's no point in calling for plausible, open-minded debate anyway. Such trolls and provocateurs occur largely on the right as well.
@Counterreactionary Did you even read the words you wrote as you quoted them? The "these are" bit shows that I am not talking about every single leftist without exception, I am talking about those which DO fit the pattern I have noted. If I was to state that many elephants weigh over five tons and then talk about these elephants you wouldn't be able to come back and "this fucking idiot doesn't even know that baby elephants exist" without making yourself look foolish.
@hieraxhideo These are newly indoctrinated leftists, they think the rest of the world is wrong, ignorant and stupid. Many of them grow out of it but it is a difficult journey and not one which says anything good about the person who was so easily and willingly duped. Also the leftists are cautioned against the process, taught to despise the whole process of learning through ones own direct life experience as if that was inferior to being taught what to think by a qualified leftist teacher.
I think there is a direct proportionality between how obvious and/or numerous an amount of factors have been missed by the potential 'idiot' and the probability of the potential 'idiot' actually being one! Willet! You're wrong! You must be an idiot! ;P
On one hand, I agree with not calling people idiots just because they keep a different opinion. On the other hand, it is sometimes too difficult to discuss with people who disrespect any facts and instead of it they just blindly follow their believe regardless they may be wrong, ignoring everything that disproves their ideas. In such case, I find it the most accurate to call such a person an idiot.
I agree. Calling someone names is almost the same as blocking them. If you stick to calling the BELIEFS idiotic and refrain from calling the believer an idiot, it usually works out better in the end.
Let's all change to: "I believe you are mistaken, Sir." :-) Though even this dilution will eventually become corrupted through overuse and abuse. The problem, at least online, is that anonymity gives the average poster far too much self confidence. There is usually an inversely matching absence of thought before hitting "Send." Fools rush in... where wise men will never knowingly tread.
@GhostOfJayLeno There is also the little matter of whether or not in fairness they fit the definition of the word. It seems these days that nobody calls idiots idiots, we call them challenged or people with learning difficulties. In contrast nobody really has any difficulty with understanding the definition of the word nigger.
You make some excellent points Martin, but points that will almost certainly fall on deaf ears. Human limitations make it virtually impossible to ever know for certain if we are ever truly right, but people are attached to their beliefs because they see them as part of their identity, so when someone challenges that, they feel personally attacked, hence the need to go on the defensive. What you talk about is an ego response and trying to reason with the ego is virtually impossible.
@bucksmasher1 If there really is a god and he's a psychotic all-powerful lunatic who gives you orders and then waits until you are dead before punishing you for all eternity if you ignore him then doing what he says is perfectly rational.
Your argument is far too generalised. Aren't you suggesting that all things are possible and that any Tom, Rick or Mary is equally qualified to espouse on absolutely anything? e.g. Drink driving is dangerous. No it's not! Yes it is! Can both be correct? Where is your evidence? We don't need any. Both opinions are equally valid. Martin says so. And he's always right. :-)
@Tricyklist Of course I'm not suggesting that everything is possible or that all views are equally valid, just that it is possible to be very wrong indeed without being stupid, or to be fully correct without being in any way smart.
If only being called an idiot was the worst of it. Normally idiot is followed up with a tirade of abuse sick, sick abuse. Especially if you are trying to debate one of the great untouchable subjects of the UK . You know, try and talk about race, sexuality, religion and not follow the PC party line... You get called just an idiot is a very, very good day.
Sometimes one can be in a majority and be right although as a rule of thumb this isn't usually case. YouTube is a huge video sharing site and as is the case with huge sites they will be a lot of idiots.
During my time on YouTube I have found people t despite all the facts and evidence one presents they choose to remain willfully ignorant, I call those people idiots. I reserve the right to insult those with bad ideas when they can be proven wrong.
Let's hear it, how many people are sick and tired of blind faith to "Anthropogenic Global Warming/Climate Change" BS?!?
That's right, I postulate that it's a fad of the decade. It is merely an attention grabbing whore of a sudo pseudo problem and anyone that blindly believes it is guilty of irrational Religious belief.
Prove me wrong I dare you, and by the way "computer models" are not proofs of anything, they are fallible tools at best.
@toulouse666 On the other hand, the scientists could have it right. Just because a bunch of enviro-fascists and west-hating marxists and leftists latch onto it for reasons entirely unrelated to what the science states does not mean its all wrong. Its not settled science, but on the other hand, they do have some compelling evidence to support the theory.
@mysock351W That's it. Only a tiny handful of people are actually competent to follow the arguments. 95% or more of the commentators and camp followers on both sides are incapable of rationally following the evidence and the debate but it doesn't stop them picking a side and calling the other side idiots, dupes, shills and unthinking partisans.
the thing is ...that connotative dissonance has such a terrible effect on the minds of people that don't fully agree with me and sadly , this phenomenon is fairly widespread.. .
@StopSpamming1 i am very careful when i call someone an idiot, because you could also be wrong and it is a little bit rude and arrogant. However i had some discussions with nutjobs who dont want to believe that the apollo 11 moon landing happened, because of their ignorance. I have no problem to call them by their name. These people are worse than young earth creationists
I did call someone ignorant a couple of nights ago in an argument but to be fair this was after 2 months of trying to convince this woman that Scottish people are not slaves owned by the English and there is no need to support a Scottish revolution.
@greeny202a And oh how evil the English are, forcing their religion on the enslaved half of Ireland. We should set them free and let them all be Catholic and one again. She firmly believes England created slavery and the entire English culture was stolen from Islam and Italy. What are they teaching in american schools?
if youre a side and you cant spot any idiots. its you. i however like the petty name calling and death threats that go along with you tube disagreements.
Only recently I likened genetics to a brick wall, whereby some bricks are shifted at meiosis. The brain I imagined as being like polystyrene packing peanuts blowing about by a multitude of connectivity mechanisms. An older thought on this matter was that genetics was like doss in computer speak, and the brain is windows. Theorizing requires all manner of juxtaposition in order to attempt to find a solution. Our brain's are so different that answers quantifiable by natural law, are very elusive.
If i could get control of the education system of the entire world for just one moment just long enough to stick one thing into it it would be a class on subjective thinking.
to tell Children from a young age about fact and opinion and it being perfectly reasonable to like or dislike things and not to force opinion on others oh and pushing my own agenda while i have control of the young get rid off Religious education and replace with culture studies to co-side with geography.
@BahamutDKing I don't think anyone needs instruction on subjective thinking everyone does it and it happens naturally. It would be like offering a class in smelling. What is needed is instruction on *objective* thinking -- that does not come naturally to humans ans is impeded by a catalogue of cognitive biases.
In youtube arguments "idiot" can almost be a complement. Also, how did that scientist believe that nothing heavier than air can fly if there are birds flying around even in his time. Aren't they heavier than air?
Democracy is a horrible idea. It is a brainwashing ideology, provided by the establishment, that is taught daily at the University and junior colleges. Democracy leads to empire, and an empire is an oligarchy who uses the majority rule of mob power, to destroy the 50% verse the other percentage. Demos is really a word for mob. Government means "mind control (Guber-ment----al); the purpose of government is to control the mind. Democracy leads to anarchy. Democracy fails.
@DemocraticEmpire "Government means "mind control (Guber-ment----al)" That is a myth that keeps getting repeated on the web. The etymology of the word is the Ancient Greek word κυβέρνησις which means to steer, pilot or guide. Also, democracy in ancient Athens was direct participatory government. Women and slaves were excluded but there was no representation like there is now. Representation of the masses is a relatively new concept and ideas of mass control came with it.
The school definition is different because they are trying to teach the students that socialism and democracy is good. The University is trying to brainwash people. I know, I graduated from college with a computer science degree. The political classes have the pilot definition for government (it's wrong). Never believe anything you read from college (it is selective honesty).
@DemocraticEmpire That doesn't match my experience of (Australian) univeristy education. I took several units in "political science" and "political philosophy at university and their was no agenda that I could detect. The only staff that tried to foist their opinions on the undergrads were some of the tutours (that were typically post-grads) but the lecturers were unbiased. One of the units I remember fondly was "Modern Political Thought" which was a survey of ideologies.
@DemocraticEmpire You do understand that representational democracy and its associated manipulation of popular opinion via mass media propaganda are quite modern phenomena. The "pilot" definition is the original and correct definition. The sort of indoctrination you speak of I recall occurred in high school rather than univeristy. In the unit I mentioned anarchism (left and right) and libertarianism were covered in an unbiased manner.
@DemocraticEmpire In the political philosophy unit I studied Rawls and Nozick were given equal coverage and the Austraian school was also given brief coverage (it was only a one semester unit).
"These are newly indoctrinated leftists, they think the rest of the world is wrong, ignorant and stupid"
Sorry, but that's a just as foolish assumption as whenever someone throw insults for disagreement. If one considers the whole left to be as such, and ignores the variety of intellectuals on that wing, then there's no point in calling for plausible, open-minded debate anyway. Such trolls and provocateurs occur largely on the right as well.
Counterreactionary 1 month ago in playlist Uploaded videos
@Counterreactionary Did you even read the words you wrote as you quoted them? The "these are" bit shows that I am not talking about every single leftist without exception, I am talking about those which DO fit the pattern I have noted. If I was to state that many elephants weigh over five tons and then talk about these elephants you wouldn't be able to come back and "this fucking idiot doesn't even know that baby elephants exist" without making yourself look foolish.
MartinJWillett 1 month ago
@MartinJWillett
Alright alright, I gotcha.
Counterreactionary 1 month ago
@hieraxhideo These are newly indoctrinated leftists, they think the rest of the world is wrong, ignorant and stupid. Many of them grow out of it but it is a difficult journey and not one which says anything good about the person who was so easily and willingly duped. Also the leftists are cautioned against the process, taught to despise the whole process of learning through ones own direct life experience as if that was inferior to being taught what to think by a qualified leftist teacher.
MartinJWillett 2 months ago
It can NEVER follow that "they are an idiot"... for grammatical reasons.
hulakan 2 months ago
I think there is a direct proportionality between how obvious and/or numerous an amount of factors have been missed by the potential 'idiot' and the probability of the potential 'idiot' actually being one! Willet! You're wrong! You must be an idiot! ;P
MrSimeon76 2 months ago
On one hand, I agree with not calling people idiots just because they keep a different opinion. On the other hand, it is sometimes too difficult to discuss with people who disrespect any facts and instead of it they just blindly follow their believe regardless they may be wrong, ignoring everything that disproves their ideas. In such case, I find it the most accurate to call such a person an idiot.
Quyanxi 2 months ago
This is so humble, I like this.
Greggah 2 months ago
Or... or... or... you might actually be arguing with IDIOTS.
blueboyblue 2 months ago
I agree. Calling someone names is almost the same as blocking them. If you stick to calling the BELIEFS idiotic and refrain from calling the believer an idiot, it usually works out better in the end.
julzabro 2 months ago
very well thought out
ghostlyatheist 2 months ago
Let's all change to: "I believe you are mistaken, Sir." :-) Though even this dilution will eventually become corrupted through overuse and abuse. The problem, at least online, is that anonymity gives the average poster far too much self confidence. There is usually an inversely matching absence of thought before hitting "Send." Fools rush in... where wise men will never knowingly tread.
Tricyklist 2 months ago
Good call. It's just juvenile to dump on someone who disagrees on something, and there is a lot of juvenile on YouTube.
CMO999 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
If a larger percentage of this world's population educates the way you think, this earth would be a greener place to live in.
popout886 2 months ago
Comment removed
popout886 2 months ago
Very true. The best idiots (myself included) are those who might be proven wrong and can say "I was wrong". But how many people can do that?
highcountryhal 2 months ago
I think that calling someone an idiot is worse than calling someone a nigger.
GhostOfJayLeno 2 months ago
@GhostOfJayLeno There is also the little matter of whether or not in fairness they fit the definition of the word. It seems these days that nobody calls idiots idiots, we call them challenged or people with learning difficulties. In contrast nobody really has any difficulty with understanding the definition of the word nigger.
MartinJWillett 2 months ago
Brilliant as always, Martin. More people like you in this world, please.
yoshobbit 3 months ago
You make some excellent points Martin, but points that will almost certainly fall on deaf ears. Human limitations make it virtually impossible to ever know for certain if we are ever truly right, but people are attached to their beliefs because they see them as part of their identity, so when someone challenges that, they feel personally attacked, hence the need to go on the defensive. What you talk about is an ego response and trying to reason with the ego is virtually impossible.
INeedTOExpressMyself 3 months ago
i consider people who kill other people because thier god told them to idiots
bucksmasher1 3 months ago
@bucksmasher1 If there really is a god and he's a psychotic all-powerful lunatic who gives you orders and then waits until you are dead before punishing you for all eternity if you ignore him then doing what he says is perfectly rational.
IF...
MartinJWillett 2 months ago
I try to never argue with idiots. They just end up bringing you down to their level and beating you with experience.
flapjackboy 3 months ago
Nuclear fission in the Earth's core is just a hypothosis (as far as I am aware)
DontBendOverForAllah 3 months ago
Your argument is far too generalised. Aren't you suggesting that all things are possible and that any Tom, Rick or Mary is equally qualified to espouse on absolutely anything? e.g. Drink driving is dangerous. No it's not! Yes it is! Can both be correct? Where is your evidence? We don't need any. Both opinions are equally valid. Martin says so. And he's always right. :-)
Tricyklist 3 months ago
@Tricyklist Of course I'm not suggesting that everything is possible or that all views are equally valid, just that it is possible to be very wrong indeed without being stupid, or to be fully correct without being in any way smart.
MartinJWillett 2 months ago
If only being called an idiot was the worst of it. Normally idiot is followed up with a tirade of abuse sick, sick abuse. Especially if you are trying to debate one of the great untouchable subjects of the UK . You know, try and talk about race, sexuality, religion and not follow the PC party line... You get called just an idiot is a very, very good day.
Gilambesh 3 months ago
You're so smart! I have a 'memorable quotes' section on a word document and you produced gold dust
SRPC21 3 months ago
Sometimes one can be in a majority and be right although as a rule of thumb this isn't usually case. YouTube is a huge video sharing site and as is the case with huge sites they will be a lot of idiots.
During my time on YouTube I have found people t despite all the facts and evidence one presents they choose to remain willfully ignorant, I call those people idiots. I reserve the right to insult those with bad ideas when they can be proven wrong.
ByTheShortAndCurlies 3 months ago
Awesome.
Let's hear it, how many people are sick and tired of blind faith to "Anthropogenic Global Warming/Climate Change" BS?!?
That's right, I postulate that it's a fad of the decade. It is merely an attention grabbing whore of a sudo pseudo problem and anyone that blindly believes it is guilty of irrational Religious belief.
Prove me wrong I dare you, and by the way "computer models" are not proofs of anything, they are fallible tools at best.
toulouse666 3 months ago
@toulouse666 On the other hand, the scientists could have it right. Just because a bunch of enviro-fascists and west-hating marxists and leftists latch onto it for reasons entirely unrelated to what the science states does not mean its all wrong. Its not settled science, but on the other hand, they do have some compelling evidence to support the theory.
mysock351W 3 months ago
@mysock351W That's it. Only a tiny handful of people are actually competent to follow the arguments. 95% or more of the commentators and camp followers on both sides are incapable of rationally following the evidence and the debate but it doesn't stop them picking a side and calling the other side idiots, dupes, shills and unthinking partisans.
MartinJWillett 3 months ago
the thing is ...that connotative dissonance has such a terrible effect on the minds of people that don't fully agree with me and sadly , this phenomenon is fairly widespread.. .
woodenmajor 3 months ago
@woodenmajor You mean "cognitive dissonance".
PiotrThePrimate 3 months ago
@PiotrThePrimate That's what he meant but he might not accept the correction because it causes too much err, what you just said.
MartinJWillett 3 months ago
As far as I know I have never actually called anyone an idiot - but I have thought this many times.
Not only over religious issues, but mainly road issues, like driving-a-car-in-a-stupid-way issues. or Microsoft-what-were-you-thinking issues.
StopSpamming1 3 months ago
@StopSpamming1 i am very careful when i call someone an idiot, because you could also be wrong and it is a little bit rude and arrogant. However i had some discussions with nutjobs who dont want to believe that the apollo 11 moon landing happened, because of their ignorance. I have no problem to call them by their name. These people are worse than young earth creationists
Serpico261 3 months ago
I did call someone ignorant a couple of nights ago in an argument but to be fair this was after 2 months of trying to convince this woman that Scottish people are not slaves owned by the English and there is no need to support a Scottish revolution.
Zarsthor 3 months ago
@Zarsthor What?!?!? Scottish people are not slaves of the English??? When did this happen? Don't tell me the Welsh are not slaves either??
greeny202a 3 months ago
@greeny202a And oh how evil the English are, forcing their religion on the enslaved half of Ireland. We should set them free and let them all be Catholic and one again. She firmly believes England created slavery and the entire English culture was stolen from Islam and Italy. What are they teaching in american schools?
Zarsthor 3 months ago
if youre a side and you cant spot any idiots. its you. i however like the petty name calling and death threats that go along with you tube disagreements.
MsReefmaster 3 months ago
Only recently I likened genetics to a brick wall, whereby some bricks are shifted at meiosis. The brain I imagined as being like polystyrene packing peanuts blowing about by a multitude of connectivity mechanisms. An older thought on this matter was that genetics was like doss in computer speak, and the brain is windows. Theorizing requires all manner of juxtaposition in order to attempt to find a solution. Our brain's are so different that answers quantifiable by natural law, are very elusive.
ianpennack 3 months ago
If i could get control of the education system of the entire world for just one moment just long enough to stick one thing into it it would be a class on subjective thinking.
to tell Children from a young age about fact and opinion and it being perfectly reasonable to like or dislike things and not to force opinion on others oh and pushing my own agenda while i have control of the young get rid off Religious education and replace with culture studies to co-side with geography.
BahamutDKing 3 months ago
@BahamutDKing I don't think anyone needs instruction on subjective thinking everyone does it and it happens naturally. It would be like offering a class in smelling. What is needed is instruction on *objective* thinking -- that does not come naturally to humans ans is impeded by a catalogue of cognitive biases.
PiotrThePrimate 3 months ago
In youtube arguments "idiot" can almost be a complement. Also, how did that scientist believe that nothing heavier than air can fly if there are birds flying around even in his time. Aren't they heavier than air?
QLIQLIable 3 months ago
Well said.
rahotep101 3 months ago
Democracy is a horrible idea. It is a brainwashing ideology, provided by the establishment, that is taught daily at the University and junior colleges. Democracy leads to empire, and an empire is an oligarchy who uses the majority rule of mob power, to destroy the 50% verse the other percentage. Demos is really a word for mob. Government means "mind control (Guber-ment----al); the purpose of government is to control the mind. Democracy leads to anarchy. Democracy fails.
DemocraticEmpire 3 months ago
@DemocraticEmpire Very good research. Do a vlog on this and using these exact words.
dutytocareforothers 3 months ago
@DemocraticEmpire "Government means "mind control (Guber-ment----al)" That is a myth that keeps getting repeated on the web. The etymology of the word is the Ancient Greek word κυβέρνησις which means to steer, pilot or guide. Also, democracy in ancient Athens was direct participatory government. Women and slaves were excluded but there was no representation like there is now. Representation of the masses is a relatively new concept and ideas of mass control came with it.
PiotrThePrimate 3 months ago
@PiotrThePrimate
The school definition is different because they are trying to teach the students that socialism and democracy is good. The University is trying to brainwash people. I know, I graduated from college with a computer science degree. The political classes have the pilot definition for government (it's wrong). Never believe anything you read from college (it is selective honesty).
DemocraticEmpire 3 months ago
@DemocraticEmpire That doesn't match my experience of (Australian) univeristy education. I took several units in "political science" and "political philosophy at university and their was no agenda that I could detect. The only staff that tried to foist their opinions on the undergrads were some of the tutours (that were typically post-grads) but the lecturers were unbiased. One of the units I remember fondly was "Modern Political Thought" which was a survey of ideologies.
PiotrThePrimate 3 months ago
@DemocraticEmpire You do understand that representational democracy and its associated manipulation of popular opinion via mass media propaganda are quite modern phenomena. The "pilot" definition is the original and correct definition. The sort of indoctrination you speak of I recall occurred in high school rather than univeristy. In the unit I mentioned anarchism (left and right) and libertarianism were covered in an unbiased manner.
PiotrThePrimate 3 months ago
@DemocraticEmpire In the political philosophy unit I studied Rawls and Nozick were given equal coverage and the Austraian school was also given brief coverage (it was only a one semester unit).
PiotrThePrimate 3 months ago
LOL, I thought this was related to Glenn Beck's work.
Tsicar 3 months ago