Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Football] Matt Le Tissier







Swansman

Pro-peace
May 13, 2019
22,320
Sweden
What I don't understand here is why you are choosing between these two huge and diverse groups? MSM includes some utter dross and some quality journalism, as does the Underground, you can add social media in to this as well. To me the key to this isn't choosing between MSM and the Underground, more choosing quality journalism - no, . . . choosing quality information.

My suggestion to you is to sidestep the media altogether and go straight to the people that are, as experts in their field researching and using the scientific method and peer reviewing to find the answers to the questions you are asking. Surely this is the best system we have to find out the mythical 'truth' you are seeking?

I do concede that it is not perfect but it is the best we have to improve understanding. Especially if one ups their critical thinking skills and learns how to find the real quality in this area (I suspect you will have no trouble in this area).

Maybe instead of looking between the MSM and the underground, Google Scholar could be your friend?

I dont choose between them, I choose neither of them, but I group them up like that because of practical reasons as its not possible to mention every single corporate/underground media entity.

Sorry, I'm not in the whole "treat science as a God" thing. Science can be distorted and manipulated, peer reviews can be biased and corrupt. Of course science is sometimes interesting to look at, but I take it all with a pinch of salt - there is too much money in it to be the objective truthteller it might have some potential to be, it is inevitably and maliciously used as a tool to sell shit (ideas, narratives, products). But obviously there are situations when science is interesting - like when it is difficult to see anyone gain profit or power from it.
 


BadFish

Huge Member
Oct 19, 2003
17,147
I dont choose between them, I choose neither of them, but I group them up like that because of practical reasons as its not possible to mention every single corporate/underground media entity.

Sorry, I'm not in the whole "treat science as a God" thing. Science can be distorted and manipulated, peer reviews can be biased and corrupt. Of course science is sometimes interesting to look at, but I take it all with a pinch of salt - there is too much money in it to be the objective truthteller it might have some potential to be, it is inevitably and maliciously used as a tool to sell shit (ideas, narratives, products). But obviously there are situations when science is interesting - like when it is difficult to see anyone gain profit or power from it.

A couple of things:

1. I never said anything like "science is god", science is the process that we use to understand the world around us.

2. Everything else in your post is the critical thinking part that I mentioned.

My suggestion is this, if you use your critical thinking and analysis skills equally on each source of information then science/research/the scientific method/academia is going to yield the best results. As I said it is not perfect and as you say it can and has been misused (Shampoo companies - I'm looking at you :lolol:) and compromised but it still is the best we have.

If you disagree then I challenge you to tell me something more reliable (with the caveat that you need critical thinking skills).
 
Last edited:


e77

Well-known member
May 23, 2004
7,268
Worthing
The reason the MSM - an expression I hate, incidentally - got Iraq wrong was because their main source was the government who acted on bad intelligence. Once it became clear a mistake had been made about the WMD they changed their tune. There is a world of difference between getting it wrong through incorrect information and a conspiracy to spread disinformation to the masses.

Two years ago we were all stuck at home under lockdown with the NHS under threat of collapsing and today our lives are essentially back to normal essentially because of vaccines. Putin has prievious with invading countries and human rights violations at home and abroad.

Great and important movements start underground on occasion but more often than not the obvious answer is the correct one.
 


Swansman

Pro-peace
May 13, 2019
22,320
Sweden
A couple of things:

1. I never said anything like "science is god", science is the process that we to understand the world around us.

2. Everything else in your post is the critical thinking part that I mentioned.

My suggestion is this, if you use your critical thinking and analysis skills equally on each source of information then science/research/the scientific method/academia is going to yield the best results. As I said it is not perfect and as you say it can and has been misused (Shampoo companies - I'm looking at you :lolol:) and compromised but it still is the best we have.

If you disagree then I challenge you to tell me something more reliable (with the caveat that you need critical thinking skills).

No, I know you didnt say that. But plenty do have that perspective. In the eyes of many, many people it has replaced religion as the all-knowing force that you're supposed to swallow without chewing.

And I definitely disagree it is the best we have. We lived succesfully as a species for about 200 000 years just ****ing, dancing, gathering shit and painting cows on the wall while 500 years or so of science, in the modern sense, has put us in a really shit situation, possibly killing off the entire species. The best thing would be to throw science, information and structures under the bus and go back to our roots. Impossible of course, but still.. calling our executioner the best we have, cant agree with that. More orgies, dancing and dying, less of this trapped in offices, stigmas and addictions stuff we've put ourselvs in.
 




BadFish

Huge Member
Oct 19, 2003
17,147
No, I know you didnt say that. But plenty do have that perspective. In the eyes of many, many people it has replaced religion as the all-knowing force that you're supposed to swallow without chewing.

And I definitely disagree it is the best we have. We lived succesfully as a species for about 200 000 years just ****ing, dancing, gathering shit and painting cows on the wall while 500 years or so of science, in the modern sense, has put us in a really shit situation, possibly killing off the entire species. The best thing would be to throw science, information and structures under the bus and go back to our roots. Impossible of course, but still.. calling our executioner the best we have, cant agree with that. More orgies, dancing and dying, less of this trapped in offices, stigmas and addictions stuff we've put ourselvs in.

I think our definitions of science are vastly different. Let's use this from the oxford dictionary to define what I am talking about

"the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment."

Obviously, we have been doing this for far longer than 500 years. I would also argue that you are somewhat conflating the seeking of studying and understanding with the using of that understanding for selfish and nefarious means. I see this conflation as throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Your alternative for increasing our understanding appears to be "****ing, dancing and gathering shit". Surely this is the exact opposite of increasing our understanding and learning about stuff? The discussion of whether we would be better to revert back to living in ignorance is really a different one.

One observation I do have (and I concede that I do not know you) is that this avoidance of understanding is entirely inconsistent with your persona on here. From what I see you are far more of the 'enlightened, truth seeker" than the **** it I'll get pissed, dance and shag type.

Am I correct in concluding that the response to my challenge of how best we can grow our knowledge and understand the world is to ignore it and work from our base instincts*?

* Of course to do this you have to ignore the fact that one of our base instincts is to learn investigate the world around us.
 


Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Patron
Oct 8, 2003
50,490
Faversham
I'm here while avoiding writing one :lol::lol::lol:

Returning to University study after a long time (Autism Studies - you may be interested to know) and lots of wheel spinning at this stage, hoping for some traction . . . any day now:lolol:

Any tips?

Tips? Turn up for everything. In assessments, write what you understand and understand what you write.

And I hope you learn something to my advantage :wink:
 


Springal

Well-known member
Feb 12, 2005
23,944
GOSBTS
 








Weststander

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Aug 25, 2011
64,322
Withdean area
The internet has churned out these loons.

Watching news footage outside the ULEZ court hearing this morning, Piers Corbyn was trying to get into every TV camera shot, holding up an A4-sized sheet. Accompanied by supporters - all older middle aged blokes wearing army camouflaged clothing. You couldn't make it up.
 






A1X

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Sep 1, 2017
17,988
Deepest, darkest Sussex
To be fair, I didn’t see it coming. I didn’t look at Rishi Sunak, Liz Truss, Boris Johnson, Jacob Rees-Mogg, Suella Braverman and Lee Anderson and even consider for a moment that they might be communists. And I bet you didn’t even.
 




















Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here