CV and mad panic behaviour

[LP]

What flawed logic is that LP - that is offensive.

You can't deny what has already happened, it's not fake news, and you're preaching a philosophy that can potentially leads morons into repeating the same mistakes of the past.

You're offering the coronavirus version of Nietzsche's Alt-Right loving philosophy, you can't hope to claim you're innocent retrospectively and you can't undo the damage once it's done if it happens!

You're arguing the societal version of "There, there, there, the danger has past it'll be alright!" You might well be right, but it's just a disastrously uniformed coin toss that your publicly broadcast opinion is based on! The dead set tell is hidden in the certainty of your convictions.

[PaulP]

You can't deny what has already happened, it's not fake news, and you're preaching an philosophy that leads morons into repeating the same mistakes of the past.

You're offering the coronavirus version of Nietzsche's Alt-Right loving philosophy, you can't claim you're innocent retrospectively and you can't undo the damage once it's done!

There's nothing alt-right or racist in his philosophy. His sister Elizabeth, who certainly was racist and outlived Nietzsche, re-presented his ideas in dubious and incorrect ways that facilitated a link to racist / hard right groups. Much the same way that Reagan co-opted, or tried to co-opt, Born In The USA, as propaganda.

[LP]

There's nothing alt-right or racist in his philosophy. His sister Elizabeth, who certainly was racist and outlived Nietzsche, re-presented his ideas in dubious and incorrect ways that facilitated a link to racist / hard right groups. Much the same way that Reagan co-opted, or tried to co-opt, Born In The USA, as propaganda.

First, I'll concede that Nietzsche's intent was probably different from the outcome, I too do not believe he was racist, but his language was dangerous.

Often it's how something is written not what their intent might be, the unintended consequences of loose language, the language of systematic and endemic slavery and oppression as a natural outcome or phenomenon of society. It infers an inequality, a lesser class.

A complication is that language changes with generations, something quite moderate in the 1900s might be consider radical in the 2000s.

[PaulP]

Often it's how something is written not what their intent might be, the unintended consequences of loose language, the language of systematic and endemic slavery and oppression as a natural outcome or phenomenon of society. It infers an inequality, a lesser class.

A complication is that language changes with generations, something quite moderate in the 1900s might be consider radical in the 2000s.

It's not Nietzsche's fault if people can't read.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/o...dynamiting

[LP]

It's not Nietzsche's fault if people can't read.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/o...dynamiting

It's not about can or cannot, it's about emphasis, Prideaux is naive if she thinks everyone who reads the same paragraph takes away the same meaning.

Think of Flyboy's case argued above, he reads the stats and opinions and states an opinion that things have peaked and intentionally or not preaches a philosophy that can be used to argue relaxing countermeasures. Someone else can read the same stats and opinions and think the worst is yet to come. The two interpretations lead to different paths, one fundamentally stating the price is life, and the other stating life is priceless.

[flyboy77]

I have simply stated what the data suggests - that new cases are peaking....

The next few days will either confirm or negate that trend.

LP, if you want to refute that, try your guts out, but the numbers are what they are...

But instead you, the font of all knowledge, jumps into some ideologically based rant.....

Laughable.

[flyboy77]

It's not about can or cannot, it's about emphasis, Prideaux is naive if she thinks everyone who reads the same paragraph takes away the same meaning.

Think of Flyboy's case argued above, he reads the stats and opinions and says things have peaked and intentionally or not preached a philosophy that can be used to argue relaxing countermeasures. Someone else can read the same stats and opinions and think the worst is yet to come. The two interpretations lead to different paths, one fundamentally stating the price is life, and the other stating life is priceless.

That is an outright lie, born of your own philosophical bent.

[PaulP]

It's not about can or cannot, it's about emphasis, Prideaux is naive if she thinks everyone who reads the same paragraph takes away the same meaning.

it is simply not possible to convey complex ideas and concepts in a wholly unambiguous way. The problem of misinterpretation exists with every book of note ever written.

[LP]

That is an outright lie, born of your own philosophical bent.

No it's not a lie, it's an opinion about another published opinion, opinions that can spread like a virus, perhaps even faster given the world's connectivity.

[LP]

I have simply stated what the data suggests - that new cases are peaking....

The next few days will either confirm or negate that trend.

LP, if you want to refute that, try your guts out, but the numbers are what they are...

But instead you, the font of all knowledge, jumps into some ideologically based rant.....

Laughable.

I've made no commentary about stats or numbers, I'm debating ideas, innocent but potentially dangerous ideas.