LOL dubman.
Can't say I disagree with much of what you said. Its just not enough to convince me that reading a lot of news sources of differing levels of quality and bents isn't a good idea and something to recommend everyone else do as well. If the reasons I gave above aren't enough I can provide more.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by sean
Until people start looking at issues like the economy, health care, climate change, education, international relations, etc as things that need to be solved rather than as arguments to be won, I fear that we'll just keep sinking deeper and deeper into this vicious cycle of animosity and self-serving manipulation.
|
That's actually the very core of the argument I was making why you *should* review a medley of news sources.
Like I said, reviewing various sources allows you to search and filter based on problem, not on ideology. Camping out on a single angle will not get you anywhere. Yes its true the attitudes you bring to the table will color your experience. But that's true whether you camp or go wander. Moreso if you just camp.
And unless you're an inert piece of angus tri-tip with the curiosity and imagination of a rock, eventually you'll have no choice but to a. suppose the possibility, b. begin a logical process of analyzing the possibility. Just because the process is tectonic in speed doesn't mean it doesn't exist, or that the process won't speed up over time.
Which is why
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dubman
come on. could you honestly be guilt tripped enough to look at pundits use weasel words to swipe at whoever you agree with just to know that you're goodly enough to sit through it?
|
completely misses the point. How do you expect any diversity of opinions to sprout up otherwise? Regardless i just don't buy the assumption that its a holier-than-thou attitude that is at play here.
I mean I don't know about you but I'm not smart enough to listen to one guy, decide I like him, formulate every possible counter argument and weakness, then decide I "agree" and turn off my brain. I doubt anyone is that smart .001% of the time. Ever experience the vertigo of watching stupid people call other people stupid? And the reason you think the stupid person calling the other person stupid is stupid is because you see a complexity of the argument that is completely oblivious to the person labeling everyone stupid?
Maybe I came across as self congratulatory, but if it helps me to burn through the occasional bubbling brook of bullshit to better my odds of not being that guy, I'm fine with that. Because if there's ever a surplus of people in the world, its the douche bags getting all hostile without reason about the stupidity of the opposing viewpoint.
Here's other reasons.
1. Know your enemy. Sometimes I watch fox news and listen to rush to get a better appreciation of where the country is at. You can hear about the birther's and the tea-party movement through the jokes and giggles of Maddow, or you can see it in action and get your own experience of it. And then weep.
2. You'll be surprised. Glenn Beck, this morning, was very surprising. A lady called in saying atheism and the constitution are contradictory and you can't believe in constitution without believing in the bible. Beck actually stopped her mid sentence and said atheists have a role in government like anyone else. He even went on to admit that the founding fathers had atheists in their ranks, mentioning jefferson and paine by name. They are welcome as long as they don't substitute God with the state.
I mean, its a start.
3. There is no such thing as unuseful information.
4. And this is the biggie. Truth will always prevail. Always always. You can spin your propeller hat all day, it doesn't change the fact that reality is the framework in which you need to achieve your goals of survival. That means that even the most loudly shouted, manipulative news source, by definition must fail, and the reasons for that failure will be stark and unmistakable.