LawTalkers  

Go Back   LawTalkers > General Discussion > Politics

» Site Navigation
 > FAQ
» Online Users: 49
0 members and 49 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 4,499, 10-26-2015 at 08:55 AM.
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-31-2018, 06:37 PM   #1996
Hank Chinaski
Proud Holder-Post 200,000
 
Hank Chinaski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Corner Office
Posts: 84,749
Re: We are all Slave now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield View Post
Agreed.



To feed his audience what it wants to hear. He's a fabulous brand architect. He gets a 120 IQ set of readers, plays to their sympathies and views, and leaves them thinking they're in the 130-140 range. He pushes well crafted tripe.

Slate's similar. They're both the high end of the HuffPo Continuum.



We're never going to agree on this. Suffice it to say, I hold a 100% opposed view. Let's leave it at that.
Is Harris the guy interviewing the Columbia student?
__________________
The conscience of Lawtalkers!
Hank Chinaski is offline  
Old 07-31-2018, 06:52 PM   #1997
LessinSF
Wearing the cranky pants
 
LessinSF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Pulling your finger
Posts: 6,777
Re: We are all Slave now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LessinSF View Post
I was pretty sure that Mueller would not be trial counsel against Manafort, but hadn't seen anything on point, but I just found this:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...rial-who-s-who
Even better - live blogging. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...rosecutionopen
__________________
Boogers!
LessinSF is offline  
Old 07-31-2018, 06:55 PM   #1998
Not Bob
Moderator
 
Not Bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Podunkville
Posts: 6,033
Lawyers dwell on small details, since daddy had to lie.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LessinSF View Post
Splendid! Thanks, Less.

ETA - I wonder if Mr. Manafort’s daughters will be called to authenticate their text messages re the “blood money” he earned from his work in the Ukraine.*

* Dear Ty: please bite me regarding the “the.” Love, Not Bob

Last edited by Not Bob; 07-31-2018 at 07:01 PM..
Not Bob is offline  
Old 07-31-2018, 09:05 PM   #1999
Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Registered User
 
Greedy,Greedy,Greedy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Government Yard in Trenchtown
Posts: 19,423
Re: We are all Slave now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield View Post
To feed his audience what it wants to hear. He's a fabulous brand architect. He gets a 120 IQ set of readers, plays to their sympathies and views, and leaves them thinking they're in the 130-140 range. He pushes well crafted tripe.
I'm not as upset at people who make their living confirming the biases of their audience as I am at people who make their living pushing white supremacy.

I will say, I veer away from cable news and toward reading stuff just because of all the confirmation bias that is pedaled. Even if some are better at it than others (the Joy Reids of the world tend to get their facts right, something you don't see with most of the Fox Mafia).

And I especially avoid cable news gatherings of all-white manels like that video you had. Usually a sign what's they are doing is completely masturbatory.
__________________
A wee dram a day!
Greedy,Greedy,Greedy is offline  
Old 07-31-2018, 11:32 PM   #2000
Tyrone Slothrop
Moderasaurus Rex
 
Tyrone Slothrop's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 31,348
Re: We are all Slave now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield View Post
Klein is absolutely being pro-censorship. He's accusing Harris of failing to view a scientific argument in necessary social context - to work to soften a debate in advance. He's saying Harris is acting dangerously.
Bull. Shit. Quote where he is "pro-censorship." That is complete bullshit. He is pro-not-taking-Murray-seriously, which is not at all the same thing as saying that Murray should be censored.

Quote:
Klein is attempting to prevent Harris from a discourse, not unlike what you are attempting here.
That, too, is bullshit. Klein is in an extended conversation with Harris, which is the exact opposite of preventing him from a discourse. I am in an extended conversation with you, which is the exact opposite to attempting to censor you. I have the technological means to censor you, by modifying or deleting your posts. Instead, I am exposing that you are full of shit, which is something quite different.

Quote:
You know I see exactly what you're doing, as does anyone else viewing this back and forth honestly.
Fantastic.

Quote:
You're going to try to corner me as someone with ill intent. This is quite cheap, but you've trended cheap as of late, so it's hardly unexpected.
Haven't said anything about your intent, have I? You are doing that yourself.

Why are you trying so hard to defend Murray's views? That is, after all, what you are doing. You can explain your own intent -- I am not putting words in your mouth.

Quote:
I am a free speech absolutist. I do not like any form of censorship, particularly those attempted on the sly.
Great. When you see censorship, let me know.

Quote:
And you still have not answered my inquiry: What on earth is lost in letting Murray, or any other "intellectual," fail on the merits?
Absolutely nothing. Murray has failed on the merits, and Harris is pretending otherwise. Why does Harris just ignore that Murray's work is terrible, that Murray has an agenda, and that reputable experts have said so? Why do you ignore that?
__________________
“It was fortunate that so few men acted according to moral principle, because it was so easy to get principles wrong, and a determined person acting on mistaken principles could really do some damage." - Larissa MacFarquhar
Tyrone Slothrop is offline  
Old 08-01-2018, 12:26 AM   #2001
Hank Chinaski
Proud Holder-Post 200,000
 
Hank Chinaski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Corner Office
Posts: 84,749
Re: We are all Slave now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop View Post
I have the technological means to censor you, by modifying or deleting your posts. Instead, I am exposing that you are full of shit

Ty showed restraint this time, but for all the newbers n.b. This is no different than Harry Truman telling China he could drop the bomb. Ty has censored perfect fully appropriate posts here, time and again.
__________________
The conscience of Lawtalkers!
Hank Chinaski is offline  
Old 08-01-2018, 10:10 AM   #2002
sebastian_dangerfield
Moderator
 
sebastian_dangerfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Monty Capuletti's gazebo
Posts: 24,410
Re: We are all Slave now.

Quote:
Bull. Shit. Quote where he is "pro-censorship." That is complete bullshit. He is pro-not-taking-Murray-seriously, which is not at all the same thing as saying that Murray should be censored.
Did you read my second to last post? That's responsive to a lot of what you've written here.

Klein is telling Harris, quite directly, how and in what limited fashion Harris may examine or discuss Murray. That is absolutely seeking to censor - both Harris and Murray. (It's also highly amusing, coming from a 34 year old who's never been anything but a pundit.)
Quote:
That, too, is bullshit. Klein is in an extended conversation with Harris, which is the exact opposite of preventing him from a discourse. I am in an extended conversation with you, which is the exact opposite to attempting to censor you. I have the technological means to censor you, by modifying or deleting your posts. Instead, I am exposing that you are full of shit, which is something quite different.
Let's not be obtuse.

Quote:
Fantastic.
Not really. I take no pleasure in calling you out for the cheapest debate tricks. I like conversing with you, and wish you could occasionally take off the lawyer hat and concede a point. But no... You've always got to be the smartest guy in the room. Even going down in flames, you'll grab any small or narrow criticism of the other side you can to save face.

Quote:
Haven't said anything about your intent, have I? You are doing that yourself.
You've lied, as you do, in suggesting Harris and I seek to rehabilitate Murray. Neither he nor I took that position. You did that to confer advantage to your argument.

Quote:
Why are you trying so hard to defend Murray's views? That is, after all, what you are doing. You can explain your own intent -- I am not putting words in your mouth.
Again, you are lying. You know I did not defend Murray. And you can see Harris is not defending Murray, but the right to debate Murray on the merits. Stop lying.

Quote:
Great. When you see censorship, let me know.
Klein's attempts at censorship are sly, but pretty obvious.

Quote:
Absolutely nothing. Murray has failed on the merits, and Harris is pretending otherwise. Why does Harris just ignore that Murray's work is terrible, that Murray has an agenda, and that reputable experts have said so? Why do you ignore that?
Now you're the arbiter of what's acceptable to debate and what's not? (See my post referenced at the start of this reply for context.) I'll grant, you're far smarter, open minded, experienced, and more qualified than Klein. But you do not have the right, or the gravitas, to run around telling people what is or is not terrible and unworthy of debate. You also undo your own aim by assuming this elite position without qualification. The better course is to examine Murray's most recent arguments and decide them on merits. And no, Murray's most recent arguments have not been settled. The Bell Curve has been largely debunked, but the man writes a book every year or so. And it's also worth noting that Harris did not have Murray on to discuss only his most recent work (most of which focuses on differences in white culture, I believe), but to discuss the issue of academic censorship. On that subject, Murray, having some unique experience (among other dis-invited speakers), is an appropriate guest.

In closing, for Christ's sake, you're better than to fawn over, or even cite, a Pez dispenser of stale liberal bromides like Klein.* Find some other milquetoast lefty darling to laud. There's no shortage of better ones out there.

______
* Yglesias and Chait go in this bucket as well.
__________________
All is for the best in the best of all possible worlds.

Last edited by sebastian_dangerfield; 08-01-2018 at 10:23 AM..
sebastian_dangerfield is offline  
Old 08-01-2018, 11:40 AM   #2003
ThurgreedMarshall
[intentionally omitted]
 
ThurgreedMarshall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 28,128
For everyone not named, "Ty"

https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/IO...in=nytimes.com

Article sums up discussion (we're all tired of here*) of tech companies, their cafeterias, and efforts attempting to get them to interact with actual people.

TM

*I know, I know.
ThurgreedMarshall is offline  
Old 08-01-2018, 01:35 PM   #2004
Tyrone Slothrop
Moderasaurus Rex
 
Tyrone Slothrop's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 31,348
Re: We are all Slave now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield View Post
I neglected to respond to this.

I can't speak for Harris, but I find Klein particularly offensive because Vox is a stridently biased website that works assiduously to hide its bias and present itself as a neutral arbiter. And arbiter isn't chosen there for lack of a better pronoun. Vox, and Klein particularly, offer themselves as authorities. The writing always holds the undercurrent, "We're the enlightened. We've the last word."

Except the site sucks. It's as predictable as Fox and only differs in extent of effort to cover up its slip. It'll almost always offer some lengthy, seemingly thoughtful assessment of an issue ending with the accepted liberal doctrinaire view.

Charles Murray is a hack. He has an agenda and he dressed it up with science. Much of what he posits can be debunked with science. Klein is a hack. He has an agenda. Much of what he posits can be debunked with economics/political science/basic reasoning.

Except they differ in one regard that makes Klein far more dangerous than Murray. Klein deems himself (particularly in that argument with Harris) a worthy judge of what's within and what's outside the spheres of deviancy. I'm sympathetic to people doing this (I love William Henry's In Defense of Elitism). Sometimes, someone simply has to stand up and say, "Nope. You can't argue flat earth theories. You're wasting our time." Klein, however, is not worthy to shine Henry's shoes. Klein's a predictable and quite dull writer who'll 90% of the time default to an accepted liberal narrative. He has no business judging how or whether the views of Murray or Harris should be considered.

Hearing Klein lecture Harris on how Harris ought to reason (to fit Klein's sensitivities) is mind-bending. Here's a blogger telling a neuroscientist with a staggering resume that he ought to temper his approaches to suit the sensibilities of the blogger's audience. He's completely confused as to who is the elite in the room.

I think this stems from confusion that to hold an empathetic viewpoint somehow makes one more enlightened, "better" than the non-empathetic. Klein and his ilk, who hold views similar to a lot of people here, confuse tolerance and a desire to see fairness as superior, perhaps even smarter, views. That's comforting, of course. But it's also untrue. To desire to help people, as opposed to someone like Charles Murray, does not render one more intelligent or enlightened. It makes one a nicer, kinder person. But it's not proof of some broader intellect that ought to give a blogger gravitas to tell a neuroscientist how he ought to approach scientific matters.

This is why Klein irks me. This is why I'll take the other side of a coin here all the time. Charles Murrays are easy to debunk. Murray's a crank howling into the wind. The Ezra Kleins of the world are officious consensus builders. They have a much more pernicious effect - attempting with some success to craft a narrative of what's acceptable commentary and what's not. These people have no business telling a serious thinker like Harris how or what to think. They are charlatans selling the feel good angle to an often Pavlovian audience, and they should be viewed with intense skepticism at every turn.
This sort of thing exposes your sometime conservative sympathies. Murray and Klein are similar but Klein is the more dangerous. Klein doesn't give the proper deference to Harris. Klein defaults to a liberal narrative. Really?

Murray spends his career promoting the idea that blacks are genetically inferior and that the government should not try to help them, and Harris wants to take him seriously, but Klein is the dangerous one with a pernicious effect. If you really think that, that's too bad.
__________________
“It was fortunate that so few men acted according to moral principle, because it was so easy to get principles wrong, and a determined person acting on mistaken principles could really do some damage." - Larissa MacFarquhar
Tyrone Slothrop is offline  
Old 08-01-2018, 01:58 PM   #2005
Tyrone Slothrop
Moderasaurus Rex
 
Tyrone Slothrop's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 31,348
Re: We are all Slave now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield View Post
Did you read my second to last post?
There's a transcript. Quote what Klein says that is pro-censorship. Just quote it.

Quote:
Klein is telling Harris, quite directly, how and in what limited fashion Harris may examine or discuss Murray. That is absolutely seeking to censor - both Harris and Murray.
Just quote it.

You can't, because you're mischaracterizing him.

Quote:
You've lied, as you do, in suggesting Harris and I seek to rehabilitate Murray. Neither he nor I took that position.
That's not a word I think I used. If you're going to accuse me of lying, you should be a little more careful about what I said. I think I said you and Harris are defending Murray. Here's Harris:

Quote:
[Sam Harris, to Klein:] You’ve suggested that Murray is trying to establish that the differences between the mean IQs in various groups are genetic, right? He’s not. He’s simply suggested that there’s good reason to believe that genes and environment both play a part.
You have described Murray as a hack. Harris is bending over backwards to avoid acknowledging that Murray is a hack, and is striving to pretend there is something worthwhile in the idea that blacks are genetically less intelligent than other people. How did I lie?

Quote:
Again, you are lying. You know I did not defend Murray. And you can see Harris is not defending Murray, but the right to debate Murray on the merits. Stop lying.
You are defending Harris, and Harris is defending Murray.

Quote:
Klein's attempts at censorship are sly, but pretty obvious.
I think you don't know what that word means.

Go ahead, quote where Klein is pro censorship. Just quote him.

Quote:
Now you're the arbiter of what's acceptable to debate and what's not? (See my post referenced at the start of this reply for context.) I'll grant, you're far smarter, open minded, experienced, and more qualified than Klein. But you do not have the right, or the gravitas, to run around telling people what is or is not terrible and unworthy of debate. You also undo your own aim by assuming this elite position without qualification. The better course is to examine Murray's most recent arguments and decide them on merits. And no, Murray's most recent arguments have not been settled. The Bell Curve has been largely debunked, but the man writes a book every year or so. And it's also worth noting that Harris did not have Murray on to discuss only his most recent work (most of which focuses on differences in white culture, I believe), but to discuss the issue of academic censorship. On that subject, Murray, having some unique experience (among other dis-invited speakers), is an appropriate guest.

In closing, for Christ's sake, you're better than to fawn over, or even cite, a Pez dispenser of stale liberal bromides like Klein.* Find some other milquetoast lefty darling to laud. There's no shortage of better ones out there.

______
* Yglesias and Chait go in this bucket as well.
None of this has anything to do with what Klein said, which is that experts in their fields have rejected Murray's work. As you said, Murray is a hack, not an academic. He puts out work with an academic veneer to try to influence politics. Pointing that out is not censorship.
__________________
“It was fortunate that so few men acted according to moral principle, because it was so easy to get principles wrong, and a determined person acting on mistaken principles could really do some damage." - Larissa MacFarquhar
Tyrone Slothrop is offline  
Old 08-01-2018, 02:05 PM   #2006
Tyrone Slothrop
Moderasaurus Rex
 
Tyrone Slothrop's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 31,348
Re: For everyone not named, "Ty"

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall View Post
https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/IO...in=nytimes.com

Article sums up discussion (we're all tired of here*) of tech companies, their cafeterias, and efforts attempting to get them to interact with actual people.

TM

*I know, I know.
I don't get how tech companies are that different from the investment banks and large law firms that have filled SF and NYC and provided their employees with food and dry-cleaning since the late Mesozoic, except that tech company employees are less likely to go out to lunch. Since I am perfectly happy to eat my lunch at my desk, I kind of resent the idea that Aaron Peskin wants to take away that option. If Aaron Peskin wants to revitalize Mid-Market, that article suggests that it would help more to do something about the people who are shitting and shooting up dope on the sidewalks. They don't bother me that much, but many people are turned off. After that's fixed, force me to go down the block to buy a sandwich.
__________________
“It was fortunate that so few men acted according to moral principle, because it was so easy to get principles wrong, and a determined person acting on mistaken principles could really do some damage." - Larissa MacFarquhar
Tyrone Slothrop is offline  
Old 08-01-2018, 02:20 PM   #2007
sebastian_dangerfield
Moderator
 
sebastian_dangerfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Monty Capuletti's gazebo
Posts: 24,410
Re: We are all Slave now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop View Post
This sort of thing exposes your sometime conservative sympathies. Murray and Klein are similar but Klein is the more dangerous. Klein doesn't give the proper deference to Harris. Klein defaults to a liberal narrative. Really?

Murray spends his career promoting the idea that blacks are genetically inferior and that the government should not try to help them, and Harris wants to take him seriously, but Klein is the dangerous one with a pernicious effect. If you really think that, that's too bad.
Ah, yes, now you paint me out as admiring hierarchies. Offering another liberal bromide.

Murray can debunked on the science. He’s weak in this regard.

Klein is not weak, and indeed dangerous, as he seeks to mainstream the notion that ideas, however offensive, should be pre-emptively rejected, or debated within his preset rules, where they offend his liberal doctrinaire views. That’s trying to control the medium, to slant the result by fixing the rules of engagement. Whether coming from right or left, this sort of rigging public debate can only be met with the response, “Fuck you.”

Re Klein, I’d add, “...you arrogant, naive little shit.”
__________________
All is for the best in the best of all possible worlds.
sebastian_dangerfield is offline  
Old 08-01-2018, 02:35 PM   #2008
sebastian_dangerfield
Moderator
 
sebastian_dangerfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Monty Capuletti's gazebo
Posts: 24,410
Re: We are all Slave now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop View Post
There's a transcript. Quote what Klein says that is pro-censorship. Just quote it.



Just quote it.

You can't, because you're mischaracterizing him.



That's not a word I think I used. If you're going to accuse me of lying, you should be a little more careful about what I said. I think I said you and Harris are defending Murray. Here's Harris:



You have described Murray as a hack. Harris is bending over backwards to avoid acknowledging that Murray is a hack, and is striving to pretend there is something worthwhile in the idea that blacks are genetically less intelligent than other people. How did I lie?



You are defending Harris, and Harris is defending Murray.



I think you don't know what that word means.

Go ahead, quote where Klein is pro censorship. Just quote him.



None of this has anything to do with what Klein said, which is that experts in their fields have rejected Murray's work. As you said, Murray is a hack, not an academic. He puts out work with an academic veneer to try to influence politics. Pointing that out is not censorship.
To tell someone how he may examine something, and that he must apply certain sensitivities where he does, is censoring him. Klein is not merely rejecting Murray. He states numerous times that he believes Harris must treat Murray, or any other controversial theorist, a certain way.

Harris states many times that he has no interest in proving Murray’s underlying points, but does believe that Murray’s views should be assessed on the merits. That Harris defends Murray when Klein says he’s been debunked does not mean Harris defends Murray’s views. Harris states that he had read that the person Klein said debunked Murray had recanted. That’s an argument of proof regarding a discrete fact separable from Murray’s theories.

Harris is bending over backward for the proposition that people like Klein (and you) should not have the right to pre-emptively tell the public what ideas are proper for debate and what aren’t. You cannot or will not separate that issue from Murray’s theories because it confers advantage in this debate, and because you believe you and people like Klein, would be enlightened sorts, are fair arbiters of what society ought to debate and not debate. You’re not. And Klein certainly isn’t.
__________________
All is for the best in the best of all possible worlds.

Last edited by sebastian_dangerfield; 08-01-2018 at 02:38 PM..
sebastian_dangerfield is offline  
Old 08-01-2018, 02:41 PM   #2009
Tyrone Slothrop
Moderasaurus Rex
 
Tyrone Slothrop's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 31,348
Re: We are all Slave now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield View Post
To tell someone how he may examine something, and that he must apply certain sensitivities where he does, is censoring him. Klein is not merely rejecting Murray. He states numerous times that he believes Harris must treat Murray, or any other controversial theorist, a certain way.
Quote it. Quote where Klein advocates (what you call) censorship.
__________________
“It was fortunate that so few men acted according to moral principle, because it was so easy to get principles wrong, and a determined person acting on mistaken principles could really do some damage." - Larissa MacFarquhar
Tyrone Slothrop is offline  
Old 08-01-2018, 02:48 PM   #2010
Tyrone Slothrop
Moderasaurus Rex
 
Tyrone Slothrop's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 31,348
Re: We are all Slave now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield View Post
Ah, yes, now you paint me out as admiring hierarchies. Offering another liberal bromide.
Dude, I don't need to paint you as anything -- I was paraphrasing what you said. I can just quote you:

Quote:
Hearing Klein lecture Harris on how Harris ought to reason (to fit Klein's sensitivities) is mind-bending. Here's a blogger telling a neuroscientist with a staggering resume that he ought to temper his approaches to suit the sensibilities of the blogger's audience. He's completely confused as to who is the elite in the room.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield View Post
Murray can debunked on the science. He’s weak in this regard.
Ah, yes. Hello?

Quote:
Klein is not weak, and indeed dangerous, as he seeks to mainstream the notion that ideas, however offensive, should be pre-emptively rejected, or debated within his preset rules, where they offend his liberal doctrinaire views. That’s trying to control the medium, to slant the result by fixing the rules of engagement. Whether coming from right or left, this sort of rigging public debate can only be met with the response, “Fuck you.”
I haven't really tried to defend Klein, so it's telling that you keep beating on him. He's not trying "fix the rules" or "preemptively reject" anything. Why is it so important to you that Murray (or Harris) be a martyr? Klein doesn't control what anyone says, and if you don't like Vox you don't have to read it. You can't just disagree with him -- you have to pretending he is somehow preventing Harris or Murray from being heard, rather than publishing an extended exchange in Vox.

Quote:
Re Klein, I’d add, “...you arrogant, naive little shit.”
Klein really does get under your skin.
__________________
“It was fortunate that so few men acted according to moral principle, because it was so easy to get principles wrong, and a determined person acting on mistaken principles could really do some damage." - Larissa MacFarquhar
Tyrone Slothrop is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0.1

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:18 AM.