General > General Technical Chat
Dilbert loses newspapers, publishers, distributor, and possibly its website
<< < (129/222) > >>
Buriedcode:

--- Quote from: EEVblog on March 11, 2023, 04:07:45 am ---..Remove the specific organ transplant thing and substitue for basic (no covid related) health issues. Once again, people and even politicans advocated for this "cancellation" of basic health rights. In that case it's absolutely trivial to argue that an unvaccinated person equally paid their taxes and is therefore completely entitled to the equal health care they paid for...

--- End quote ---

So an alcoholic who requires a liver transplant but refuses to give up drinking should have the same right to an organ as someone who does not engage in behavoir that will likely reduce the value of that organ?  Or a smoker?  Being unvaccinated isn't a "health issue" as that implies that it is some kind of disease, or something that is out of ones control - it is a choice, and one proven to improve health outcomes.

I am not suggesting that all unvaccinated people should have had all operations or treatments denied, but you specifically said organ transplants - where organs are in short supply, and all transplants carry with them a lifelong obligation to specific behavoir and habits (as well as lifelong immunosuppressants).  Vaccination is especially important for organ recipients because of this - the risk/benefit equation is very much skewed. The waiting lists for organs are long and must be prioritised to ensure the maximum benefit. Whilst there are myriad reasons for a person to move up/down the lists - actively refusing to fulfill an obligation that improves the outcome or increases the success of the operation will likely put you down the list.

In a society with a national health service, there is an obligation to provide the best "bang for your buck" - and that includes not wasting extremely valuable/scarce resources on those who refuse treaments on ideological grounds.  That isn't all treaments, just those that are the most expensive/valuable.
EEVblog:

--- Quote from: Nominal Animal on March 11, 2023, 02:22:43 pm ---
--- Quote from: Kim Christensen on March 11, 2023, 04:49:56 am ---What I'm saying is that by falsely undermining a subject they are effectively delegitimizing it under the guise of skepticism.
--- End quote ---
I am saying that questioning a subject is not delegitimizing it, it is testing it.

Testing an idea, concept, belief, or model, is the only way to determine its worth.  Subjecting something to a test is not delegitimizing it.  Testing itself is a neutral act.

--- End quote ---

Interesting examples of this in our domain were the Electroboom vs Dr Lewin KVL debate. Mehdi didn't overturn the science, but damn it was an interesting practical vs theoretical debate.
The Veritasium transmission line debate was similar.
And Thunderf00t's research on why sodium explodes. That was as solid a known scientific concept as it gets, taught in science classes everywhere, but he turned that concept on it's head.

Looking back at covid, things that people are now apologising and backtracking for in droves were obvious if you didn't have your mob-mentaility blinkers on. Threatening and coercing people by mandate and fear was always the wrong approach.
Kim Christensen:

--- Quote from: EEVblog on March 11, 2023, 10:31:39 pm ---Looking back at covid, things that people are now apologising and backtracking for in droves were obvious if you didn't have your mob-mentaility blinkers on. Threatening and coercing people by mandate and fear was always the wrong approach.

--- End quote ---

What things are medical experts and scientists apologizing for in droves? Who are these apologists?

vk6zgo:

--- Quote from: coppice on March 11, 2023, 04:04:53 pm ---
--- Quote from: vk6zgo on March 11, 2023, 04:49:47 am ---
--- Quote from: Nominal Animal on March 11, 2023, 02:06:22 am ---
--- Quote from: HuronKing on March 11, 2023, 01:51:12 am ---I'm sure someone will argue that newspapers have been trained to preemptively pull authors who say stupid crap. But what about the agency of the newspapers here?
--- End quote ---
I honestly thought we discussed this already.

The majority just wants to live their lives in peace, and not risk anything because of something that does not impact their personal lives.

The true effect of cancellation or shunning is not that the target loses their livelihood, it is the fear it induces in the majority.  It is that fear that makes the majority keep quiet, not rock the boat.

--- End quote ---

Ohh, I'm so terrified! ;D

--- End quote ---
Of course you are. You are Australian. Every Australian I've talked with about free speech agrees they aren't really free to express themselves while they are in Australia. I'm not saying that isn't also true for people from many other nations, but I've found Australians particularly bothered by this.

--- End quote ---

You must really talk to a lot of weirdos.
KaneTW:

--- Quote from: Nominal Animal on March 11, 2023, 02:22:43 pm ---
--- Quote from: Kim Christensen on March 11, 2023, 04:49:56 am ---What I'm saying is that by falsely undermining a subject they are effectively delegitimizing it under the guise of skepticism.
--- End quote ---
I am saying that questioning a subject is not delegitimizing it, it is testing it.

Testing an idea, concept, belief, or model, is the only way to determine its worth.  Subjecting something to a test is not delegitimizing it.  Testing itself is a neutral act.

This, testability, is at the very core of the scientific method.  We have no better tool for examining things rationally, using our logical faculties.  (I myself recommend Popperian falsifiability approach, where you question most the things you trust or most hope are true.)

The only thing that gets damaged by testing is belief and ego.  I admit, I don't care if testing ideas and concepts, and asking questions, hurts some peoples egos or beliefs.  We got here by questioning.  If we stop now, and switch to relying on our emotions and instincts, we might just stop using tools and language, and become a nonsentient eusocial species.

--- End quote ---

I had a discussion with a friend a while ago and he put it pretty well (paraphrased):
'Millenials always want to be on "the right side" and never on "the wrong side" so they don't feel insecure. They don't want things to be better, they just don't want to be wrong.'

The modern person is so afraid of being wrong that the act of questioning itself is anathema.
Navigation
Message Index
Next page
Previous page
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...

Go to full version
Powered by SMFPacks Advanced Attachments Uploader Mod