Comments by "Mark Pawelek" (@mark4asp) on "Psychology with Dr. Ana" channel.

  1. I see your irony. A pseudointellectual is someone who can pwn their opposition by bypassing and short-ciruiting debate.
    2
  2. Trust what the government want you to believe?
    1
  3. Thanks for this. Very useful; even more fascinating. The whole issue of ghosting and withdrawal is fascinating. Thanks for going tha extra mile to cite the studies.
    1
  4. How will we ever know they are a "true intellectual" unless they venture into the public sphere to give us their argments to to face down the pseuds?
    1
  5. The problem with this argument "never believe anything on the internet" is: - authorities are sometimes lying to us - mass media are often lying to us - TV is often lying to us - your best friend, whom you sometimes seek advice from, ... Even your university professor may be lying to you - perhaps - without even knowing it! (or worse: fully or partially knowing it)
    1
  6. "has almost universally led people to assume..." <- No. I don't assume everything has substance to it unless I know the author or they provide a link to their substance. Where is your link to the long substantial critique of almost everyone you're claiming here?
    1
  7. There are many problems with appeal to authority. 1. Authorities can be wrong: mistaken or dishonest. 2. Authorities may be simplfying complex or uncertain arguments & evidence to justify dubious policy. 3. So instead of appealing to an authority - why not repeat the argument made by that authority. In which case - if you know the authority's argument - why are you "appealing to authority" in the first place? 4. AtA is routinely used to by-pass discussion and reason. Which I assert is bad for: democracy and civil society. 5. Authorities may want to simplify an argument to short-circuit a policy discussion 6. Those who cite an authority rarely know what the authority's argument is. They try to end discussions over policy by claiming the: "issue is settled"; because "X knows ...", and X has decided. So AtA is a way to by-pass an argument. One does not provide the authority's rationale, one simply says Professor X knows and Z is the policy Professor X favors; or Y is the argument Professor X showed (without you having to give that argument). Very often - those citing the authority haven't the faintest idea what Professor X said nor do they care. 7. So: AtA is routinely used by elites to shore up their power. The puppets and minions of the elites resort to AtA so often, and so routinely that - along with monstering (ad hominem) AtA is one of the most common, and evil, logical fallacies. Try to make it your habit to never appeal to authority. Instead - learn the argument and cite the evidence. If necessary, get yourself a notebook to summarise your point (I'm sure you have one already!) Because each time you rely on AtA, you make it easier for charlatans, authoritarians and anti-democrats to hide bad arguments behind AtA.
    1