Who is being referred to here? I would say, like a great deal of things, the actual definition of research has been lost to many people. The problem is there is no prize for getting it correct and, therefore, no incentive.
Who is being referred to here? I would say, like a great deal of things, the actual definition of research has been lost to many people. The problem is there is no prize for getting it correct and, therefore, no incentive.
What happens after Pinocchio says "My nose is about to grow." ?
It's a paradox, think about it. His nose only grows when he lies, but if he is truthful about it growing....
Last edited by Kirby101; 06-13-2021 at 04:15 PM.
There came a time when the Old Gods died! The Brave died with the Cunning! The Noble perished locked in battle with unleashed Evil! It was the last day for them! An ancient era was passing in fiery holocaust!
I agree. But, again to take for example Covid, an individual citizen cant' really "do the research". It takes teams of scientists all around the world working on these issues, most of them with education and expertise far surpassing the average citizen, many with decades of experience in their fields. Even when their research is published most of your average citizens would need an interpreter to navigate what they're reading, and the likelihood of them missing a key point or misunderstanding a detail that changes the complexion of what they're reading is not just a danger but a near certainty. That's before you get into personal agendas.
When you're selling a miracle silver cure for Covid, or you're trying to get clicks for your conspiracy blog, or you just plain don't want to wear a mask around people or social distance or stop going out to bars (like the rest of us f##king don't) and want a handy excuse it's easier to undermine the narrative or misinterpret facts to justify doing so. That's the danger. I see memes all the time where "Trust the Science" is their punchline. They're literally trying to undermine the legitimacy of science to get out of inconveniencing themselves. Add to the mix the already existing hostility to science in that it often contradicts their holy books and facts/reality become political. It's insanity.
And that's just the biggest issue of the day. Whether you're talking about the minutiae of Congressional protocol or legal precedents the Supreme Court will look to on the big issues of the day or a billion other topics that are difficult sometimes even for experts to understand the average person just doesn't have the time to research them all to try to understand the world around them better, and may not be able to do it successfully even if they devoted all of their time to any one issue. That's where trust in authority and experts/expertise comes in, why the media is so important to package and explain the issues for the voters, and why undermining both is a great idea for groups that might not have our best interests at heart.
This isn't to say you shouldn't try to understand the world around you, just that you're probably not going to be able to do all of the research yourself and are instead going to have to rely at least somewhat on the expertise and consensus of experts. That may be hard for some to do, but it beats the hell out of thinking the Earth is a flat disc in a bowl because you haven't personally been to outer space, or that the moon is hollow, or the Covid vaccination is a way to mind control us. Which is what you get when trust in the system breaks down, because interesting bulls##t beats boring and inconvenient facts for far too many people.
Nobody said anything about COVID. Covid is a recent phenomena that even the experts don’t have all the information about. Why would we be talking about that?
As I said before, several posts ago, it's an example. It's something a lot of folks who claim to be "doing their own research" instead come with conspiracy theories and nonsense. Here, let me just cut and paste my old post again:
"The problem with people doing their own research is them shopping for the "research"/answers they want. Or avoiding the ones they don't. Take, for example, the ongoing Covid pandemic. You only have to make a quick visit to right-wing blogs or Conspiracy subreddits to find people confidently proclaiming one or more of the following: Covid's a hoax/the regular flu, it's a Chinese bio-weapon meant to weaken the West to allow them to overtake us, it can be cured with Vitamin D or hydroxychloriquine, the death toll is nowhere near 600k in the US, the vaccine is either more dangerous than the virus/a secret plot by Bill Gates to "chip" all Americans with the mark of the Beast as Satan planned/giving us magnetic powers/a plot to change our DNA/etc. Then you have masks and behavior around them.
All of this nonsense has been extensively "researched" by the people spreading it, and all it takes is a few medical professionals/politicians trying to gain attention or make a buck lending the appearance of credibility to the conspiracy theories and you muddy the waters. It's anti-science, sometimes proudly so. Critical thinking and questioning official narratives can be of value, but there has to be something legitimate there. Your crazy uncle who thinks the moon is hollow and can link you to a Youtube video from a guy who used to work at NASA isn't a legitimate source of information or a substitute for real experts/scientific study.
Not to say that you are in any way advocating for that, just that it's an attitude that can be used as an excuse for literally doing the opposite and just glomming onto whatever bulls##t fits a person's worldview."
Wasn't meant as an end-all/be-all when it comes to failed personal research, just a handy and timely example. Why I gave others in the post after that (your flat earths, hollow moons, etc.). And again, not saying doing research (as in digging into topics beyond the headlines) isn't a good thing. Just that we need to be careful when Joe-Bob the garbage man thinks he knows better than Dr. Fauci because they watched a couple of Youtube videos and they're angry Dr. Fauci got treated with more respect and authority than Trump just because he was a doctor.
Yeah the problem is it's a bad example. You're trying to comment on that and that's fine, but it doesn't have anything to do with what my point was.
Is Lawrence of Arabia gay or a heterosexual? I haven't watched the film. Was there a leading lady in the movie?
Last edited by Zauriel; 06-16-2021 at 08:04 PM.
Perhaps you can clarify your point? My examples and arguments were that while doing research in the sense of educating yourself on the issues of the day or on topics of relevance or interest to you is certainly a good thing to do there is a danger in folks doing so poorly or intentionally seeking false information to avoid inconvenient truths.
In that regard Covid is a timely and easily understood example of the dangers of people seeking bad information or believing themselves to be experts without having done actual research. As I said before, it's an unrealistic expectation that any one individual with a basic education could "do the research" if given decades to do so.
Is there something in particular you disagree with about my arguments on the dangers of poorly done or intellectually dishonest research? If this isn't the type of research you were speaking of, what is? And could you give examples and/or expand the opinion? I'm not trying to troll, but I had commented in good faith hoping to highlight the potential dangers of rejecting expert opinion or research, and think I did so clearly but there seems to be some confusion.
No. But the presence or absence of a leading lady doesn't mean a movie is or isn't using LGBT themes - there were leading ladies in Spartacus and Ben-Hur, for example. In the first we have a man die in another's arms and his last words are "I love you.". In the second the actor for Mesala has gone on record that he was playing the part that way, and IIRC, he states that was how the director told him to play it.
Dark does not mean deep.
That is still an open question. He has no sexual relationships in the movie, it is about his efforts in WWI. There is a subtle ambiguity in the movie, but it doesn't say one way or another, and it's not a key part of the movie. By accounts he was asexual in his life.
It is also one of the greatest movies ever made and a must see.
There came a time when the Old Gods died! The Brave died with the Cunning! The Noble perished locked in battle with unleashed Evil! It was the last day for them! An ancient era was passing in fiery holocaust!
Romans, and the Greeks from whom they took many points of philosophy, had a very different view on sexuality than what dominates most of the world today. I suppose I never read anything into Tony Curtis' final line in Spartacus because he fled Olivier's character - in part - because Olivier was beginning to make advances on him (the whole "do you eat oysters or snails" dialog).