name calling is not an argument, and other thoughts.

To start, I wanted to rant a bit about the trend in calling people who disagree with a particular viewpoint "sheeple," "robots," "Brainwashed," or other pejoratives that imply that the person disagreeing is not thinking for themselves. This bothers me for two reasons, the first being that the simple act of disagreeing is an act of thinking for onesself, and the other  being that such name calling is usually on the part of someone that isn't bothering to state an argument based upon facts.

Now, I strongly dislike the use of fallacy in argumentation, but using one fallacy to defend another just plain puts me in the sort of foul mood that makes what happened to Sodom and Gomorrah look like a minor hissy fit. This is because neither is really defensible, especially in the majority of cases where the second fallacy is being used to defend the sort of conspiracy theory that even the most dedicated wearer of tinfoil headgear sceptical.

I guess it boils down to a strong dislike on my part for people who fail to see the flaw in arguing that the absence of proof of something is evidence of that thing, and then expecting someone who asks for evidence that can be taken seriously to not get upset when their ability to engage in critical thinking is called into question for no reason other than they use their critical thinking skills........


Well, that can get into a fatal loop, and so I will opt to use the option where I move on to something else.


It has become a running joke that The Daily Show and the Colbert report are the best news shows around...

The sad part is that it is because the rest seem less interested in reporting news, and more interested in creating it. For example, Fox seems to have not gotten the memo about intentionally editing footage of speeches to change the meaning of the speech, as they seem to do it regularly. Then again, they might merely be having a problem where their cameras actually take footage of an alternate reality where their claims are real, and not paranoid fantasies of a global conspiracy to make them look foolish... Then again, how does that explain how they are unable to understand how everyone else has a different view?

Then there is Cnn, who is unable to figure out that we can see the bus passing behind one reporter's screen, to the next screen with a different reporter, all while they are commnicating  theough a "satellite link." Apparently, on the planet that CNN reports from, it takes a satellite to communicate with people 50 feet away...

Local news isn't much better, between the puff pieces being reported as real news, and the condescending attitude they mistake for charm, it ends up as unwatchable.

At least Mr. Stewart and Mr. Colbert make no claims about being real journalists when they present the news...