“Woke”

Jarod said:
I read that book a long time ago and his race is not relevant to the value of his opinions.
Click to expand...

I did no know there was going to be a test, but yes to me 18 months ago was a long time for me...

I remember thinking he set up fake strawmen and then knocked them down with oversimplified rational. He came off sounding like a Professor who never really experienced the real world.

I disagree when he said Woke was reverse racism and that it oversimplified racial issues, defining people as racist or not-racist, which is not reality.
 
Flash said:
I explained it clearly..I explained it clearly. Any personal information you use in an abusive manner. Just like you lied or forgot I never said my wife was Asian, but you claimed I said that. Not saying she was Asian is not a lack of articulation but making stuff up on your part.
Click to expand...

No you didn't.

You didn't explain anything.

You just blurted out some vague and ambiguous bullshit ("my wife has faced more discrimination than you will ever know") and then didn't elaborate further, leaving me to have to fill in all the blanks because you didn't.

So you become hyper-focused on the Asian thing because you don't want to focus on just how empty, shallow, and meaningless that previous statement really was.

Also, why do I have this feeling that you aren't telling me the full story? Why do I feel like you said your "wife faces more discrimination and prejudice than I will ever know" because you couldn't disprove the existence of institutional racism.

So what discrimination and/or prejudice did your wife face that I'll never know?
 
Jarod said:
I did no know there was going to be a test, but yes to me 18 months ago was a long time for me...

I remember thinking he set up fake strawmen and then knocked them down with oversimplified rational. He came off sounding like a Professor who never really experienced the real world.

I disagree when he said Woke was reverse racism and that it oversimplified racial issues, defining people as racist or not-racist, which is not reality.
Click to expand...

So youve decided that a black persons experience isnt the "real world"? Very nice
 
Flash said:
Sometimes people use personal examples because if they just make a general statement it can always be questioned. If I use an example that actually happened to me it can illustrate points you might otherwise claim can't happen.
Click to expand...

The personal statements you and everyone else makes when trying to debate me ARE ALWAYS GENERALIZED...that's why I question them all the time.

The only reason to invoke personal given circumstances is because you can't invoke anything empirical that everyone can look at.

So you are asking me to take your word for it, and I don't see why the fuck I should.

So can we all agree that using personal given circumstances to lend your argument credibility proves just how discredited the argument is?
 
Flash said:
When discussing voter registration I pointed out a person can just register and claim U. S. citizenship and the state can't generally question that. I mentioned two Chinese (these were Asian) sisters who registered to vote but told me they were not citizens. You accused me of lying, but I could have just as well said people can register without proving their citizenship and you could have also said it is not true.
Click to expand...

I accused you of lying because you refused to verify any of it, just like how you refuse to verify this discrimination your wife faces that apparently I will never know...not because of my ignorance but because you won't tell anyone.

That's why I think it's fake...you felt compelled to invoke it because you couldn't invoke anything empirical.

I don't trust that you know how to do the work.
 
Flash said:
Nobody wants to debate on the internet and be insulted. You have insulted my age (no better than race), said I was a poor professor, and lied about things. As a result, people are reluctant to engage in real debate with you because of your anger.
Click to expand...

If you don't want to be insulted, then don't act like a fucking know it all.

Awwww did the poor little baby have his age insulted?

Gee, it must be really really bad to have someone attack you based on your age and experience, huh?

The biggest difference between us is that I don't think any of that personal shit matters to the arguments I'm making on JPP. I am able to separate myself from the arguments I'm making, which is why I don't invoke personal things like you do.

In fact, you'll see in my posts that the only things I reveal about myself are where I live and that's it. Why? Because none of that other stuff matters; I can make an argument without invoking personal given circumstances, and I don't think many people on JPP can. The reason why is simply because they don't do the work, and it's all about the work.

So if the work for you is inventing/invoking personal things about yourself that happen to confirm your inherent biases, then you're not doing the work.
 
LV426 said:
So if the work for you is inventing/invoking personal things about yourself that happen to confirm your inherent biases, then you're not doing the work.
Click to expand...

It has nothing to do with biases. If it is a subject I know something about I try to explain the facts, especially if the poster gave incorrect information. It is not being a know it all to state factual information when you are fairly confident you are correct.

One reason I come on JPP is because I learn a lot when i am not sure about something being discussed and find the answers.

I did not mind correcting your misinformation on several occasions and hopefully it informed others. Your acknowledgment that I was correct verified the information for both of us.
 
You got it. So this Right wing attack on “woke” is the argument that the better state of consciousness is being asleep.
 
LV426 said:
I accused you of lying because you refused to verify any of it, just like how you refuse to verify this discrimination your wife faces that apparently I will never know...not because of my ignorance but because you won't tell anyone.

That's why I think it's fake...you felt compelled to invoke it because you couldn't invoke anything empirical.

I don't trust that you know how to do the work.
Click to expand...

You cannot verify something that happened to you personally. And, it just gives you something more to argue about. I did post the Supreme Court decision which struck down the AZ law requiring more proof of citizenship, but that is not proof I had two students who were non-citizens that registered to vote.

You just don't like facts that challenge your political beliefs and somewhat limited knowledge of some subjects.
 
Flash said:
It has nothing to do with biases. If it is a subject I know something about I try to explain the facts, especially if the poster gave incorrect information. It is not being a know it all to state factual information when you are fairly confident you are correct.
Click to expand...

When you or anyone else invokes personal given circumstances in a debate, what you are doing is trying to establish the credibility of your inherent biases.

For example...you can't seem to disprove the existence of institutional racism along empirical lines, so you invent a spouse that would face discrimination which automatically makes your argument credible...at least, YOU think it does.

To me, it makes your argument less credible because you can only seem to invoke personal given circumstances that you and only you can observe.

So I have to take your word for it, and there is absolutely nothing in this world that would make me comfortable with taking you at your word.

So you need to do better.

So what discrimination did your wife face that I will never know? Is it institutionalized misogyny? Is that what you're referring to? Of course I wouldn't know about that discrimination because I'm not a woman. But that's not what you meant, is it?
 
Flash said:
You cannot verify something that happened to you personally.
Click to expand...

If it's not something that can be verified, then why are you saying it? Is it because you don't have anything empirical to share?

Why the fuck are you even opening your mouth if you're just gonna tell tall tales?
 
Yakuda said:
That's leftism

https://nj1015.com/nj-rutgers-prof-white-people-need-to-be-taken-out/
Click to expand...

EXACTLY!!! It's the prime component of every issue they try to address! Especially the damn tater head administration. First tranny surgeon general, first black female incompetent VP, first incompetent gay transportation secretary, first dementia-ridden octogenarian incompetent "president". It's exhausting and harmful to the nation and intelligent people just do not give a damn anymore. Fuck it. Find someone competent regardless of where he sticks his/her/it's genetalia or how much melanin is in the skin.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=yysKhJ1U-vM&si=EnSIkaIECMiOmarE
 
LV426 said:
When you or anyone else invokes personal given circumstances in a debate, what you are doing is trying to establish the credibility of your inherent biases.
Click to expand...

Using a Supreme Court decision to prove a fact has nothing to do with biases. I was surprised about the decision myself because I did not realize states could not require proof of citizenship.

You argue about Supreme Court cases without ever reading them and confuse conveying factual information one's opinion about the issue.

Whether I am credible or not does not depend on personal examples but factual information which you often fail to acknowledge even when proof is presented.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top