Comments by "" (@josephcoon5809) on "Post-Truth: Why Facts Don't Matter Anymore" video.

  1.  @wranglerboi  Information is information regardless of veracity. Furthermore, information is useless until acted upon.
    14
  2. Incorrect. You may become intelligent, but intellectualism implies that one understands the significance of what they know. Knowing that the derivative of x^2 is 2x, but understanding why and how it is useful is entirely different.
    5
  3. Supply and demand. The internet has, arguably, created an easily accessible and large supply of information, yet college education has skyrocketed since the advent of the internet. Basic economics would suggest that there’s something more to college education. There is. Colleges provide TWO services: dissemination of knowledge AND certification of retention of that knowledge. Therefore, the supply of knowledge increasing suggests that it is actually the cost of certification that has skyrocketed as the cost of knowledge dropped. That simple bit of logic seems to elude most self-styled “enlightened” individuals which results in a backwards orientation of discussion topics. “Who should pay for college?” should be discussed AFTER “Why is college so expensive?” Solving the latter makes the former a much easier conversation to be had and solved. Unfortunately, the benefit of specializing in a certain subject occludes the myopia that develops. Science is about learning about things, but it is sorely lacking in applying that knowledge in a useful manner for society. You talk about the hope you had for the internet, but you missed or neglected what it should have done to the cost of education. That EXACT same narrow-minded myopia plagues the “global warming” discussion. What you don’t understand about knowledge is that it has two main purposes in regards to the cerebral cortex: projection of history through the present to imagine many possible futures; and to develop a path from the present to the best possible future imagined. To be so mired in the effort to “prove the other side wrong,” robs you of the ability to process the second purpose of knowledge: formulating solutions. This results in the lazy act of voting for government to coerce change in society in lieu of society taking the time to create solutions. The cerebral cortex evolved for the same reason that bifocal vision evolved: depth of perception. Bifocal vision allowed depth of spatial perception, and the cortex allowed for depth of temporal perception. Society has neglected that ability far too long while they reveled in the wonder of the internet. So, most of what you say is true, but you don’t seem to understand the full implications of everything you said. I don’t either, but it seems I’ve considered further reaching implications than you have. If I sound arrogant, that’s because I’m using the same tone and language that you are using in your disingenuous narrative implying that people you disagree with are wrong. I don’t have to communicate this way, and I actually prefer not to. However, discussions tend to be like a tennis match, and, more often than not, the ball is returned in the same manner it was served.
    2
  4. You feel CNN is more truthful than Breitbart? You should rewind your video to the bit about confirmation bias.
    1
  5. Speaking on controversial topics is important. Speaking on it like you are an absolute authority on and arbiter of what is truth is the problem. EVERY time I engage in a conversation about “AGW,” I do so with the intent to find truth. However, my interlocutor generally gets to a point in the conversation where they have tapped their wellspring of sound bites and canned responses leaving them unable to explain anything further: I’m pedantic and obtuse. No. I’m digging for answers because I crave answers. To talk to people who do not have the same cravings but are resolute in their beliefs is the problem with the “scientific” and “truthful” side of the discussion. That’s what makes your arrogance so bad glaring when you “discuss” things like anthropogenic global warming: you talk down from a self-proclaimed intellectual high ground making your contributions to the actual discussion useless.
    1
  6. I used far fewer words than that in the video. Where is your critique of the video?
    1