in Observations, Society 41 Words

AMEN!

Well said…God knows I have to agree…..it is time consuming, frustrating and at times irritating to refute bullsh*t!

Sadly, I cannot let lies and misinformation go unchallenged…..so I spend some time frustrated and irritated…..such is life……

Embedded image permalink

23 thoughts on “AMEN!”

  1. 😉 As is my wont, a simple quote covers the issue….

    “Yes! Living in today’s complex world of the Future IS much like having a hive of bees live in your head. But, there they are!” — Firesign Theater

    Call Guido & Luigi; they’ll take care of it….

    gigoid, the dubious

    Reply

      1. Yes, it is! Mostly because facts are ignored! Doing research to the actual source, which is often completely different as the twisted rewrites of it. And in the end getting mean and insulting because their shere ignorance is confronted!

      3. well said….sometimes I feel like Don Quixote….tilting at those wind mills….but I do enjoy research….chuq

      5. I enjoy research…..I am constantly reading and writing…..you know when I was in Spain I did not know there were so many windmills…..they are everywhere….LOL

  4. The problem with research is that no matter how you research the source materials are always going to be biased in one manner or the other and it is human nature to choose from among those research sources that agree with one’s own dearly-held perceptions. This phenomenon is not always done consciously either so regardless of how the research is done if it does not follow the scientific principle of objectivity it cannot be any more than a theory or a theorem. The hang up here is that popular or widespread acceptance of a proposition is no guarantee of its scientific accuracy or validity because the element of bias is always present.

    Reply

      1. Yes, “Refuting” is a legitimate word and is, in point of fact, the present and past tense use of the word, “Refute.” eg: “I am refuting, you are refuting, they are refuting” — I was refuting, You were refuting, They were refuting, — when you ad an “ed” to the word, “Refute,” you get the objective impersonal use of the word, “Refute” — ie; “I refuted, You refuted, They Refuted” and if you move on to the truly literal objective sens of the word you can legitimatelly say, “It was refuted,” They refuted it — etc., ad infinitim, ad nauseum.

      3. I have eight certificates in English usage and I still can’t get it right all the time and as to the coffee .. maybe you need to raise the octane so it will last longer.

    2. When researching you have to be objective as possible. But bias will creeping in. That is true. That’s why I research different sources, to find the original. What helps is to read in the original language. I’m Dutch and reading English and German text isn’t a problem. Translation will often leave out the exact translation of a word. Sometimes you must be aware of the culture it is based in.

      Reply

      1. I too use many sources…..I research a lot in the Middle East and that helps me because I read Arabic and I can get more info than most news sources…..my Dari and Farsi is not so good but I can get the meat of the story…..chuq

      2. I think the researching of political subjects is very difficult and I think it is absolutely impossible to arrive at non-polluted conclusions which are not saturated with one bias or the other.

        The nuanced differences between the objective and non-objective perceptions of the various demographic strata of any political spectrum are a hinderance no matter how careful the researcher is or how elemental the material is supposed to be.

        Whatever research is done and whatever mechanism is used to arrive at conclusions the results are always going to be representative of the views of either a particular bloc or voters or a particular ideological assumption of many target groups.
        I do not subscribe to any theory that political observations can ever be unbiased and therefore I do not subscribe to the theory that reliable statistics can ever be obtained when dealing with issue-oriented research such as, for instance, the “Abortion” issue. (Just one of many possible issues.)

        It may be possible to obtain some reliable indicator of mass opinons or viewpoints within given groups by making sure the number of persons contributing ideas to the research are big enough to be representative of the cross section of society being queried but even in these circumstances — and yea, even in spite of these circumstances, the only really trustworthy data that can come from this kind of research effort is that result which is based in and limited to numbers and not abstracts.

        When dealing with conceptual research the elements of deviation and variance must be calculated and introduced into the equation if any kind of objectivity is ever to be realized from the research being undertaken.

        I believe that along with all the above there is a necessity to invoke other elements to the research – elements such as average and mean values as interpreted, understood or perceived among the various representative groups affected or intended to be affected by the research being undertaken. These are often hard to ascertain and the attendant results of seeking to attain them may end up being more relatively qualitative in nature than quantitative or absolute.

        One must also consider the effect that changing circumstances and the passage of time might have in altering the form, substance and applicability of any data gained from the research as it is generally found that nothing is the same at the conclusion as it seemed at the beginning and non-concrete conglomerations of ideological affirmations or perceptions are always in flux.

        Where the is nothing absolute about the elements of political research there can therefore be nothing absolute abouot any conclusion that could be considered reliably to be the last and totally authoritative word on the matter at hand.

        So bias is always going to win no matter how careful the research.

      3. Bias will always find its way no matter the subject….all one can do is attempt to look at it objectively….and then we go back to semantics…..what does objectively mean? The problem is most people like think tanks enter into research with a conclusion and make the re4search fit that conclusion…..there can be objectivity applied….but few truly want to…..and that is why there is so much negativity and insults when writing or talking about politics….objectivity can be employed and an absolute is something for dreams…..

      5. In Dutch politics insults aren’t common. Verbal aggression would make it almost impossible to make our parlement work. In a country that has a multiparty system you have to have a climate were making alliances with other parties is essential. A country like the Netherlands couldn’t work in a two-party system. American debates are shocking from the outsider view.

Leave a Reply