When did arguments start to lose their basis in reality?

[1srelluc]

We've all seen it countless times over the last decade, when it really seems to have run wild to the point of lunacy.

You make a point based on the realistic probability of a decision or action and the retort is "well, it's possible that THIS could happen instead."

I used to think this was just people being deliberately obtuse, to avoid "losing" an argument. Now, I'm not so sure.

It appears that hazard recognition, risk assessment and intelligent weighing of data before making a decision is a foreign concept amongst a large chunk of our population.

Yesterday during a SNAP conversation I saw where a woman posted that she never thought she would end up a single mom, yet here she is with 5 kids by 3 different fathers.

A comment was made stating "birth control does exist you know..." and there were a bunch of angry "how dare you" replies to the effect of "birth control isn't 100% effective" "many women are unable to take hormonal birth control" and on and on....Just excuses to condone poor decision making.

Let's think about how ineffective birth control would have to be, in order for it to completely fail 5 times for the same woman.

Let's also think about how many women would have to be incompatible with this method for us to end up in the current situation with so many unplanned pregnancies.

Obviously these results are "possible". The real question is whether they are probable or plausible.

I don't know the reason but folks these days seem to have a real problem with the concepts of Possible, Plausible, and Probable.

 

[1srelluc]

I sense nervous laughter from you pknopp.

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

When did arguments start to lose their basis in reality?​

When they started the process emptying the mental institutions in America -- in the 60's.

.

 

[d0gbreath]

It was 6/11/15 at 10:00a.

 

[Woodznutz]

We've all seen it countless times over the last decade, when it really seems to have run wild to the point of lunacy.

You make a point based on the realistic probability of a decision or action and the retort is "well, it's possible that THIS could happen instead."

I used to think this was just people being deliberately obtuse, to avoid "losing" an argument. Now, I'm not so sure.

It appears that hazard recognition, risk assessment and intelligent weighing of data before making a decision is a foreign concept amongst a large chunk of our population.

Yesterday during a SNAP conversation I saw where a woman posted that she never thought she would end up a single mom, yet here she is with 5 kids by 3 different fathers.

A comment was made stating "birth control does exist you know..." and there were a bunch of angry "how dare you" replies to the effect of "birth control isn't 100% effective" "many women are unable to take hormonal birth control" and on and on....Just excuses to condone poor decision making.

Let's think about how ineffective birth control would have to be, in order for it to completely fail 5 times for the same woman.

Let's also think about how many women would have to be incompatible with this method for us to end up in the current situation with so many unplanned pregnancies.

Obviously these results are "possible". The real question is whether they are probable or plausible.

I don't know the reason but folks these days seem to have a real problem with the concepts of Possible, Plausible, and Probable.

It's just one more way the devil is destroying us. There is no other plausible explanation.

 

[Darkwind]

I hear that aspirin works wonderfully for birth control.

The woman holds one between her knees while entertaining company.

 

[whitehall]

Most internet arguments are usually anchored on some left wing media source. Since most media sources favor democrats, the logical conclusion is no surprise. Factor in several decades of left wing propaganda in everything from elementary schools to universities and you have a witches brew of left wing propaganda.

 

[WorldWatcher]

August 1st 1988 with the national introduction of "Angertainment".

WW

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

We've all seen it countless times over the last decade, when it really seems to have run wild to the point of lunacy.

You make a point based on the realistic probability of a decision or action and the retort is "well, it's possible that THIS could happen instead."

I used to think this was just people being deliberately obtuse, to avoid "losing" an argument. Now, I'm not so sure.

It appears that hazard recognition, risk assessment and intelligent weighing of data before making a decision is a foreign concept amongst a large chunk of our population.

Yesterday during a SNAP conversation I saw where a woman posted that she never thought she would end up a single mom, yet here she is with 5 kids by 3 different fathers.

A comment was made stating "birth control does exist you know..." and there were a bunch of angry "how dare you" replies to the effect of "birth control isn't 100% effective" "many women are unable to take hormonal birth control" and on and on....Just excuses to condone poor decision making.

Let's think about how ineffective birth control would have to be, in order for it to completely fail 5 times for the same woman.

Let's also think about how many women would have to be incompatible with this method for us to end up in the current situation with so many unplanned pregnancies.

Obviously these results are "possible". The real question is whether they are probable or plausible.

I don't know the reason but folks these days seem to have a real problem with the concepts of Possible, Plausible, and Probable.

We've all seen it countless times over the last decade, when it really seems to have run wild to the point of lunacy.

You make a point based on the realistic probability of a decision or action and the retort is "well, it's possible that THIS could happen instead."

I used to think this was just people being deliberately obtuse, to avoid "losing" an argument. Now, I'm not so sure.

It appears that hazard recognition, risk assessment and intelligent weighing of data before making a decision is a foreign concept amongst a large chunk of our population.

Yesterday during a SNAP conversation I saw where a woman posted that she never thought she would end up a single mom, yet here she is with 5 kids by 3 different fathers.

A comment was made stating "birth control does exist you know..." and there were a bunch of angry "how dare you" replies to the effect of "birth control isn't 100% effective" "many women are unable to take hormonal birth control" and on and on....Just excuses to condone poor decision making.

Let's think about how ineffective birth control would have to be, in order for it to completely fail 5 times for the same woman.

Let's also think about how many women would have to be incompatible with this method for us to end up in the current situation with so many unplanned pregnancies.

Obviously these results are "possible". The real question is whether they are probable or plausible.

I don't know the reason but folks these days seem to have a real problem with the concepts of Possible, Plausible, and Probable.

It started when
1) Children were allowed to grow up without knowing the difference between an opinion & fact or why it's important to know the difference
Teacher: "You got the answer to this arithmetic question wrong"
Child: "Well that's just your opinion"

It got worse when
2) Those children became adults and they were allowed to believe that an uninformed/uneducated opinion based only on their beliefs or feelings was just as important, valid or had the same weight as the opinion of someone who is informed/educated on the topic.

For me personally, with my upbringing there was a certain element of embarrassment involved in pontificating on a subject that you knew nothing about and therefore made yourself look like a fool by misstating something in a public arena such as an internet message board or acknowledging your belief in something completely asinine. As we can see here on just this one message board there are a ton of people who have no such misgivings.

Once there were more people in the latter group than there are in the former, that's all it took for us to have what we see today.

 

[stan ford 4]

You're on a forum. Consider that your point of reference might be skewed.

 

[Woodznutz]

It was 6/11/15 at 10:00a.

August 13, 1981.

 

[Invisibleflash]

We've all seen it countless times over the last decade, when it really seems to have run wild to the point of lunacy.

You make a point based on the realistic probability of a decision or action and the retort is "well, it's possible that THIS could happen instead."

I used to think this was just people being deliberately obtuse, to avoid "losing" an argument. Now, I'm not so sure.

It appears that hazard recognition, risk assessment and intelligent weighing of data before making a decision is a foreign concept amongst a large chunk of our population.

Yesterday during a SNAP conversation I saw where a woman posted that she never thought she would end up a single mom, yet here she is with 5 kids by 3 different fathers.

A comment was made stating "birth control does exist you know..." and there were a bunch of angry "how dare you" replies to the effect of "birth control isn't 100% effective" "many women are unable to take hormonal birth control" and on and on....Just excuses to condone poor decision making.

Let's think about how ineffective birth control would have to be, in order for it to completely fail 5 times for the same woman.

Let's also think about how many women would have to be incompatible with this method for us to end up in the current situation with so many unplanned pregnancies.

Obviously these results are "possible". The real question is whether they are probable or plausible.

I don't know the reason but folks these days seem to have a real problem with the concepts of Possible, Plausible, and Probable.

Don't remember the date. But years ago, when PBS had opposing viewpoints, they had a black guy and a retired white cop on TV. When they asked the black guy why blacks don't follow the laws, the black said, "slavery was a law, so why should he follow white people's laws."

Takeaway...blacks have to run everything, or it is white supremacy.

It was about that time. Maybe Obama era.