Wonder what an "uninformed" debate would look like.
It would look like every other place online where public comments are posted. Informed comments mixed with the grossly uniformed along with misinformation, half-truths, and disinformation thrown in for good measure.
Careful, Russ. You'll upset TechTalk, whoever he (or, of course, she) might be. He (or, of course, she, but I think probably he) thinks this debate is pretty high-level stuff and has reprimanded me for describing it as drivel.
Jeremy
I've not found myself to be unable to express my own opinions or in need of someone to presumptuously state them for me with false opinions that are not representative of my own. I cannot only express my opinions more accurately but more succinctly, without irrelevant he/she prattle stuck into the middle of my sentences.
First, I don't have a problem with this particular comment from Russ as there is a great deal of uninformed commentary. If there weren't, I wouldn't be posting; I would just be reading. Because there is so much uninformed commentary, I do NOT think "this debate is pretty high-level stuff" as you falsely stated on my behalf. Nowhere online have I seen debate that is "pretty high-level stuff", where there is open commentary, as it never fails to attract a great many emotionally motivated and ill-informed comments.
In addition, I have not "reprimanded" you "for describing it as drivel". It positively rains drivel, making an umbrella advisable at times. What I have specifically criticized is the occasional, but unnecessary, inclusion in your comments of what I perceived to be patronizing, gratuitous, or condescending comments on the intellectual abilities and capacities of people involved in discussions here.
Such as this most recent example posted beneath photos of two birds fighting...
Sadly, they probably have, and indeed are exhibiting, greater capacity for intellectual argument than most of the contributors to the political threads.
Well shot, too.
Jeremy
The difference in perception between you and I may stem from the fact that I don't assume that comments posted that I find poorly reasoned or expressed are necessarily a reflection of intellectual ability. My experience has been that otherwise intelligent people often speak and act in ways that belie their intelligence due to the keen ability that emotions have to override one's reason. Motivated reasoning is the term used in social psychology for this phenomenon to which we are
all susceptible regardless of education, intellect, or accomplishment.
For instance, I don't know what your reasoning was for mocking me by expressing views on my behalf to which I don't subscribe. Perhaps it was because you consider me to be part of the majority you seem to believe lack a "capacity for intellectual argument" in these threads and therefore took it upon yourself to speak for me. Or, maybe it was motivated reasoning due to a dislike of being the criticized rather than the critic. Perhaps it was something else that I haven't considered. I have no way of knowing, so I won't speculate as to your reasoning.
Lastly, I don't wish you to think that I believe myself above criticism or am unable to accept a good-natured ribbing. Obviously, you're just as entitled to
your opinion as the rest of us and I assume as well that
none of us deem ourselves above criticism. However, if you are engaging in tongue-in-cheek comments; since it is your tongue and your cheek, perhaps you could project the comments from
your voice rather than mine in the future. I would appreciate it.
Poll
