That an opinion lacks evidence does not alleviate the requirement that its factual allegations be supported by evidence. “I don’t think the surface of the earth is curved” may be an opinion, but it’s a provably wrong assertion, and adding a disclamitory phrase to it doesn’t excuse the statement from evaluation.
Citation needed.
Reading this thread makes me feel like I need to update my blood pressure prescriptions.
As a young teenager: Do not start working until you have to. Once you start, you’ll never stop.
Why on earth do you think I’m arguing in bad faith? What do you think my real beliefs & agenda are?
I think your real beliefs and agenda are that you don’t want student loan forgiveness for anyone, ever, under any circumstances. Maybe you’re bitter because you didn’t go to school or maybe because you did and already paid off your debt. Maybe you have a chip on your shoulder, or maybe you’re just a troll. I don’t really care. It doesn’t matter, because the argument is reprehensible regardless of your motives:
We should let John Doe in Alabama die because it’s too expensive to save him.
You decided that the financial expense of saving a life is worth condemning a patient to death just like you decided that the imaginary, hypothetical political cost of a change in policy is worth consigning multiple generations to lifelong debt.
You should be ashamed of yourself. But whether you are or not, I’m not interested in debating with you.
The argument is bad and probably in bad faith. If I can paraphrase it in a few lines and demonstrate how ridiculous it is, it’s not deserving of a response.
You don’t have to attend every argument you’re invited to.
“Sorry about your cancer. We have to let you die so maybe cancer researchers will be motivated to try harder for a permanent cure.”
Get out of here with that bullshit.
So we should just not let the people currently sick have the cure? 🤔
Even in your analogy, curing any cancer today, even if it doesn’t extend to future sufferers, is an improvement over curing no one. Because fuck cancer, and fuck student loans.
Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
We have not created the heavens and the earth and everything in between except for a purpose. And the Hour is certain to come, so forgive graciously.
15:85 Quran
I’m incredibly fascinated by the ghost comparison. Is the probability that ghosts are a real physical phenomenon higher or lower than the probability that aliens exist or have visited us? That’s an extremely interesting question, and I’m sure someone could do a statistical meta-analysis comparing the incidence of, say, UFO sightings with the incidence of paranormal experiences (if such an analysis doesn’t already exist). Both questions seem like the things that should be generally empirically falsifiable (and indeed, specific instances certainly are), but humanity’s curiosity about both has proven remarkably durable despite centuries of curiosity and myriad efforts to settle (negatively) both questions once and for all.
Sure, but in this case the something worse is multiple orders of magnitude worse. Statistically, what one individual does to lessen their “carbon footprint”–a propaganda term–is insignificant.
The problem isn’t that individuals are therefore absolved of responsibility–they’re absolutely not. It’s that they might accept the worst offenders’ direction on how they can meet that responsibility.
That is to say, recycling your trash isn’t the answer. The answer is holding Darren Woods to account.
Really? I’d be very interested in seeing a peer reviewed article in Nature in which someone reputable claims to have disproven the existence of the soul (especially without making a bunch of other ontological assumptions first). Can you point me to one?
As far as I can tell, the existence of a soul, like the existence of God, is inherently a non-scientific proposition–i.e., it is not falsifiable. But correct me if I’m wrong.
Pennies on the dollar? I don’t necessarily doubt you, but where do I get that machine for less than 10 grand?
Common mistake: When you’re ascribing a bad quality to them, “millenials” means everyone born after 1960. If you’re ascribing a good quality to them, it only means people born between December 12, 1989, and December 14, 1989.
This last round was the line for me. Canceled the whole Hulu/D+ mess and haven’t looked back. My Jolly Roger is a little tattered these days, but I still know how to fly it.
Ahh… classic.
Estuans interius …
Yeah, my bad. I forgot how cool it is to just spout whatever bullshit you want. Hurray for ignorance.
No wonder humanity is doomed.