31–40 of 53 posts
I remember reading this article about Daryl Davis the black musician who converts Ku Klux Klan members ( https://www.theguardian.com/music/2020/mar/18/daryl-davis-bl... ). If I'm correct one of his trick was to let people talk and ask them questions that would highlight the inconsistencies in their talk.
I'm far too disagreeable to perform the empathy dance and they're too old and stubborn and functionally illiterate to boot to listen or understand that they've swallowed propaganda.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does skepticism take into account factual knowledge gained through rigorous study? ? Because there are many emperical facts that these so-called skeptics are not only ignoring but calling out as fake.
Rigorous study would be years of research. We had months and it was rushed. We're still learning. What we have now is a best attempt. Actual facts would be something like washing your hands or boiling water preventing diseases. Nobody questions it anymore but they once did. But for the same reason, it's important to let people question. It was once doctors who opposed the idea of sanitation.
it's the implied answers that are the problem, the jumping to conclusions
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does skepticism take into account factual knowledge gained through rigorous study? ? Because there are many emperical facts that these so-called skeptics are not only ignoring but calling out as fake.
Rigorous study would be years of research. We had months and it was rushed. We're still learning. What we have now is a best attempt. Actual facts would be something like washing your hands or boiling water preventing diseases. Nobody questions it anymore but they once did. But for the same reason, it's important to let people question. It was once doctors who opposed the idea of sanitation.
People are questioning exactly these things. Germ theory itself is under attack. Masks have been used for many years in healthcare settings to hinder the spread of airborne pathogens, yet now we hear they are useless...
Maybe a collection of facebook profiles of people who were publicly skeptic about covid/vaccine and then suffered from the disease would be helpful. There are quite a few posts like this on reddit, but they often lack in empathy and are simply screenshots that aren't as convincing as a page with history/photos/etc. I'm wondering if compiling such a list online is feasible from ethical and legal stand points.
An interesting approach worth looking into is motivational interviewing:
> The central premise: Instead of trying to force other people to change, you’re better off helping them find their own intrinsic motivation to change. You do that by interviewing them — asking open-ended questions and listening carefully — and holding up a mirror so they can see their own thoughts more clearly. If they express a desire to change, you guide them toward a plan.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/31/opinion/change-someones-m...
https://meltingasphalt.com/crony-beliefs/
Spoiler: It is primarily about hidden self interest. But people will never admit it and will argue using any information they can find to support their goal. So it is pointless to attack with logic based counter arguments. Identify and counter actual self interest of the opponent instead.
People that believe the official covid narrative are the ones affected by fake news in my opinion. I wish people could see how their freedom is being taken away everyday and anything that goes against big pharma is labelled fake news. I'm certain if you speak out against the CCP killing off Uyghurs in China then that is labeled as "fake news" in China. I'm almost certain this comment will get flagged. Which will prov…
It's jam packed with information. Hope it helps.
[0] https://youarenotsosmart.com/2021/08/23/yanss-213-how-to-imp...