TrueScotsman

Regular Member
  • Content count

    764
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

TrueScotsman last won the day on July 14

TrueScotsman had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

249 Excellent

About TrueScotsman

  • Rank
    Skeptic

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    United States
  • Interests
    Philosophy, history, psychology, religious study, music, singing, hiking, reading, Wife, and my beautiful son. :)
  • More About Me
    Former Mormon, former Evangelical Christian, and present non-reductive naturalist atheist.

Previous Fields

  • Still have any Gods? If so, who or what?
    I do not.

Recent Profile Visitors

342 profile views
  1. Here comes Donnie: I love it

    Trump has already increased military operations to be in excess of all of the operations last year, including launching a strike against a sovereign state without Congressional authority. Clinton was hawkish, but so is Trump.
  2. What Foreigners think of Americans

    Does calling my comments intellect signaling undermine their content? Yes, whatever other intentions you may or may not have had are irrelevant to the fact that you chose to insult me personally and then proceeded with further misrepresentations. You didn't even seem to understand my point in your misrepresentation so you seem to have put a lot of effort into dismissing my remarks for someone who isn't arguing and therefore not fallacious. So how should I talk in the future without intellect signaling? Certain words or phrasing should be avoided? Don't state anything factual or analytical? The irony of the anti-PC folks is that they are all about free speech but jump all over anyone who talks in a particular way. It seems all this movement has accomplished is the freedom to be an Asshole in discourse whenever you please, as you can see in this thread from the others trolling and trying to egg me on. Gotta love Ex-C sometimes.
  3. What Foreigners think of Americans

    Labeling my comments as simply intellectual signaling is an ad hominem, that's a fact.
  4. What Foreigners think of Americans

    @JadedAtheist You said: "Let's not clutch at our pearl necklace shall we?" What do these little jabs add to the conversation? Does it make you feel good? You said: "You were not calling for me to expand on my observations (Does anyone really see a call for more information? I don't even see a question mark in the reply)." Where did I state that I wanted an expansion on your observations? I responded to your remarks, with my remarks, that's kind of how it goes on an open forum, right? You said: "The essence of your post was the implication that I didn't understand the history of the US (such as why those ideas about healthcare arose), that I was making generalizations and that they are stupid and "crass" because they're not accurate in the specific case." So now we hear the interpretation of my remarks from you now, good, making progress. Apparently, if anyone wants to make any commentary that has no direct reference to the speaker, you automatically assume that the other person didn't understand whatever it is you're saying? My first paragraph gave my response to how America tends to breakdown in terms of politically and culturally, which perhaps you may or may not have been familiar with (I don't know you, so I don't know what you know). Regarding generalizations, I prefaced my remarks with "personally," letting you know this is my personal opinion I was giving there. I then said why gross generalizations of nations (as in an whole nation) is silly because you rightly pointed out, none of them are generally speaking true, and my other point is that they activate troubling modules in the brain which can cause us to gossip. Nothing personally mate, you have a brain like all of us. The specific generalizations I responded to were from the video, nothing you actually said, such as superficiality and authenticity. In fact, if you read closely about what I said, I was basically directing you to the point that some generalizations are more useful about the United States, such as statements about particular regions. You said: "My reply was pointing out that you didn't add anything to the conversation by saying generalizations don't represent each and every individual." That's not what I said, I was dismissing generalizations of entire nations, not the utility of generalizations in smaller contexts, such as a region, city, neighborhood, which now I am just basically repeating myself. You seem to have just read "offense" and not really actually thought about anything I said. You said: " The condescension of the "you need to understand our historical context to understand why we believe what we believe now" combined with what I already mentioned was what caused me to view your post as "intellect signalling". If only I had as smart and sophisticated as you, I would consider generalizations to be beneath me, and know that they serve no real purpose as they're not completely accurate." More misrepresentation, I made statements, you provided the interpretation and all the moral/virtue/intellect signaling or whatever you guys want to call your ad hominems today. You said: "Considering the lightheartedness of the video, I didn't realize that any observations I shared would require substantiation. Am I writing a thesis here or sharing an anecdote? What were you hoping for? Me to share studies confirming the opinions shared in this video and my post, along with some rigorous analysis of the facts? This reply is absurd. That said, if you're looking for further explanation, now is the time to ask. What is it that you wish for me to expand on or add to what I've said?" You tend to insert most of what you want to hear, which is insults and condescension and all that other bullshit, rather than actually dealing with the content of my posts accurately. I don't really have any desire to carry this conversation any further.
  5. What Foreigners think of Americans

    If I started talking about Australians and said something which prompted you to provide more information or just your general comments, I would think those would be welcome given you come from that country. I come from the United States, and while you might not be specifically referring to me were any of my comments in response actually about me? Did I drone on about how smart and sophisticated I am? No, I made comments about how we developed over the regional geography, actually an important thing to note as it makes more sense to begin generalizations there rather than more broadly. But I guess we can just be lazy about the generalizations we make, as we wouldn't want to go around and say something intelligent and informed, people might think we just want to look good to a bunch of anonymous strangers. I find its just best to address the substance of someone's response, but these snide remarks are becoming the standard around here, ad hominem in lieu of thoughtful response.
  6. What Foreigners think of Americans

    America is extremely complicated culturally, we have had large periods of immigration unique in human history and an expanding territory which precipitated a regional development to America. The diversity also is heavily politicized by both sides, and always has been so its difficult to understand why someone would make comments like that on healthcare unless they understand some of the Classical Liberal ideas which remained powerful to many people in the South and Midwest, especially as we opposed Communism quite explicitly for decades which had a huge influence on how people view public provision for essential care. Personally, I think any kind of gross summation of a nation is really silly and usually activates areas of our brain responsible for moral judgement, and comes across more as crass gossip, such as Americans are more superficial or less authentic than Europeans. Or we care more about status and are mainly extroverts who aren't interested in important issues, etc. I'm quite certain this is true for many, but not even close to representative, as someone who has been to nearly every state and major city. It depends on the region, city, neighborhood, just as it usually does everywhere around the world where culture isn't totally dominated by the State and especially where there is diversity on the scale as we have it in the United States.
  7. Battling the BS doesn't end with religion

    This isn't what I observed at all, the Republicans are comprised of internal factions and don't necessarily have a unified media. There are the more traditional and nationalist conservatives, this would be Brietbart and Info Wars more on the extreme right now and represents the core base for Trump, while the neoconservatives formerly in power might take opposing positions usually through National Review. Libertarians usually lie in the middle either joining in because of a shared hatred of the Left, or sometimes staunchly opposing the big government policies of Trump. I say all that to express that many of these outlets outright try to subvert some of the more damming claims about Russia as of late, such as their assistance in trying to provide cover for the Assad regime's use of chemical weapons, and of course the hacking of the DNC coming from the Kremlin. While I don't think the present Russian Federation is a new Soviet Union, I think that's a kind of lazy historicism that is always trying to read Stalin or Hitler into the present. I think he is an authoritarian, not a totalitarian ruler, but I think this kind of State Capitalist authoritarian approach is on the rise around the globe and being seen as perhaps more decisive than Liberalism. This was what the march towards fascism looked like and was accompanied by messages of cultural superiority and nihilism, along with increased nationalism, with the catalyst of fanaticism being the discontent of war and economic depression. Russia is something we want to see less of in the world IMO, so we should take a softer containment approach to their regime than we did the Soviet Union, i.e. no proxy wars or arms races. I disagree that they share our interests at bottom, but when they do we should work with them.
  8. Battling the BS doesn't end with religion

    Really? The American public is deeply divided across the board, and even though this is a part of ideological biases, it is also reflective of the fact that such political dichotomies are allowed to persist and exist in relative harmony with the Republican-liberal model of government. Consensus isn't a bad thing fundamentally, but political consensus of entire populations on almost all issues is extremely rare, except when there is an authoritarian element which exercises consensus building at a very thorough scale. Propaganda in other words, exists in all countries, but authoritarians use it as a long term means for a continuation of a particular regime, whether that be Putin as an individual in the case of Russia or the Communist Party of China for another example. You also mistake bias as being the same as propaganda, certainly different outlets emphasize particular stories and frame them in certain ways in order to communicate the message that outlet thinks will be responsive to their reader base, i.e. click bait can be ideologically charged. This is a problem which has pernicious consequences on both sides of the aisle in the United States, with liberal bias being apparent in certain platforms, such as CNN, MSNBC, ABC, Ny Times, Wa Post, etc. These platforms receive material benefit from being fsithful to report on what their base is interested, but there is also some semblance of journalistic standards that exist with some of these outlets when it comes to more partisan issues. However, the Right has developed an alternative media and knowledge system as well, developing think tanks such as the Heritage Foundation, AEI, etc. While also producing media largely populated by intellectuals from these think tanks to write their editorials. Town Hall is a good example of this, as they regularly report on the news, but daily feature partisan editorials on the Left/Liberals that appeal to a base which has a common ideology or at least common enemy (progressive activist liberals). In the United States it is quite easy to diversify your sources to understand at least, the different narratives promoted by particular segments of political factions, but in Russia there are no explicit factions contrary to the State. At least none which are not thoroughly condemned and subverted by the State, who has total sway and control for the narratives produced by Russian speaking media organizations, and use RT as propaganda to contradict much of what is reported on in the West. I do find it ironic that people are defending a despotic and authoritarian regime to such a degree, while claiming I am indeed irrational or misinformed. No one wants war, but bullshit that comes out of a country which sought to undermine our democracy will be called out for what it is. Sorry, it doesn't jive with the opinion of the "in" crowd here, but someone had to speak up in the echo chamber which this subforum has become.
  9. Battling the BS doesn't end with religion

    Getting rid of NATO helps one nation, Russia, which is why they are the only nation who favors its destruction as it thwarts Putin's goal of rebuilding his empire as we have his expansionist policies well documented. Vigile who seems to echo Putin's thinking happens to live in Russia and be daily exposed to State propaganda, and is also echoed by far right media such as the Nation, Washington Times and of course Info Wars. This happens through partial half truths sometimes, such as his claim that Washington Post and the CIA have a $600 million dollar deal, which on the surface would make one think the CIA is doing some kind of propaganda campaign. Which means... Russia is a nothing burger (fake edits from O'Keefe), Trump is innocent and Russia is not behind this and it is all a Democrat conspiracy to undermine the president through the media and deep state in order to reassert their stranglehold over America and the globe... Make no mistake folks, when you begin to fact check this nonsense you have the same usual suspects regarding the sources which are friendly to Trump and Putin, and authoritarian right-wing governance in general. You also find that they report some of the same made up or warped stories creating a digital echo chamber for their readers, making them think they are getting the real news and that the MSM is totally corrupt for not reporting what these outlets do. Back to the $600 million deal, which is with Amazon owned indeed by Bezos as is Wa Post, but it is actually for a cloud computing solution. This was done through an RFP like most government projects and was responded to and awarded to Amazon as a result. Zero evidence of conspiracy against the media by the CIA here. Of course the other thing that happens here is because I am rebutting these claims I must think the government, media and private sector are totally clean and virtuous. I don't, the state will always need to be opposed on matters of human rights because concerns for national security usually cause a trend towards more surveillance and these can build the infrastructure of an authoritarian government, unless democratic institutions are protected and fought for by the average citizen. We are not perfect or incorruptible, we are incredibly fragile as a society at this stage with the increasing global trend towards authoritarianism, lobbying by monopolistic corporations in the West has left many people jaded about these institutions but I actually trust the wisdom of the founders here. Which is that the structure of government although filled by sometimes partially compromised individuals is separated both to prevent consolidation of power, but also to keep the separate branches competing and confining the power of the other branches. The. Judiciary may check the powers of both, while amendments and future rulings allow adjustments to judicial rulings, and Congress and the president are always in a tension of delegation of authority on some issues, while restraint and oversight is emphasized in other areas. Is it a perfect form of government, this Republic and the Press which has been the 4th check on power? Absolutely not, but it beats Putin's authoritarian crony Capitalism where has put himself at the head of this oil based ponze scheme making himself one of the richest in the world if not history. I dare say that if Vigile began preaching Liberal Republicanism he would not be safe in doing so openly as a prominent activist, many have tried and died in the process. Sadly, consensus in Russia now has almost been universally achieved by the populace, a sure sign of intense propaganda.
  10. Here comes Donnie: I love it

    An Epistemology perfectly comfortable with conspiracy theories? That's not critical thinking, that's selective critical thinking as research on the subject suggests. Love how disagreement with the "in" crowd equates to being absent of critical thought, meanwhile conspiracy theories are asserted as factual almost on a daily basis. This is indeed the second thread promoting views from 9/11 truther that you've made, and the joking comments in favor of RT demonstrate my point. Ageism and confirmation bias unfortunately restrain you and BO from intellectually engaging the arguments and therefore I am dismissed after providing my arguments as misinformed, ignorant, and basically just a young stupid kid. I have kids, a family and have worked hard despite incredible challenges to have some success in my life, and none of my views reflect a naive child's take on the world when I have invested many years of my life to these subject matters. The pervasive bigotry on this board is quite apparent, and the ageism in particular is rather pernicious with so many who come here are deconverting at a young age, often at college. Where supposedly no one learns critical thinking anymore. Sorry for disrupting the echo chamber that's created by you guys on this subforum, but others opinions matter and are welcome here too. But feel free to ignore those who disagree on these subjects, it does well to inculcate the kinds of thinking I am talking about.
  11. Battling the BS doesn't end with religion

    Barbara Honegger a 9/11 truther claims this was said, my independent research revealed the following. Barbara seems to be the source of his claim as well as many other conspiracies, this one being linked to the October Surprise conspiracy of 1980. However, I could not verify any other details just more shady websites claiming it is true. Bullshit doesn't end at religion, but at some point you have to recognize there needs to be certain standards for believing certain things are true, such as the robustness of the evidence. This seems to be the case that you'll believe a quote like this if you're biased in distrusting America, but I thought I would respond to this OP as I think misinformation on the United States government is at an all time high, and regularly trashed here on Ex-C. But then again, maybe their plot was correct and I am brainwashed by the CIA! Not likely...
  12. Here comes Donnie: I love it

    I disagree with your assertions and conclusions, therefore I don't exercise critical thinking? Go read my posts on subjects where you don't have a bias, and you'll see that I do engage in substance on a number of topics, sorry I don't buy the pro-Russia nonsense supported in this thread. Since you don't like people responding to you with disagreement, I'll try to avoid responding to you in the future.
  13. Here comes Donnie: I love it

    This narrative works great for Putin, who cares about the annexation of crimea when we can always allude back to Bush invading Iraq. Look, the United States is without a doubt not perfect, however, we have something as a nation which gives us a leg up on Russia in terms of our influence in the world, and that is democracy. That sovereignty of the nation doesn't ultimately reside with one man, but is shaped and evolved by the population, and this means that even though we battle with corruption like every other nation, the United States has the capacity for tremendous good as well. I will defend human rights, democracy, and equality, the State Department official diplomatic objectives any day against Putin's foreign policy objectives and values. We might not all be good guys, but we stand up for good things on the global stage which Russia does not and that is ultimately what will be remembered about this time. That is unless the authoritarians win and write their own histories, but perhaps people just underestimate how fragile democracies are especially with the rise in technological threats. Now is not the time to stand on the side of defending Russia, not when they just hacked our elections.
  14. Losing Your Faith and Mental Health

    Great thoughts, thanks for sharing! I will respond to this when I get back.
  15. I have some friends coming over tonight, but I will address this either later in the evening or early tomorrow, as well as give my response to the video which I enjoyed watching. Love me some good ol' philosophy of mind.