Not saying it’s definitely the case but the conspiracy minded part of me can’t help but notice the attack on the synagogue in Manchester was very conveniently timed around when the flotilla arrived in Israel. Could just be coincidence of course but we’ve seen what they’re capable of making happen. This would be very easy for them. And this isn’t to have any disrespect towards the victims of the attack, even if it was a false flag or whatever it doesn’t make it any less of a tragedy. Plenty of Jewish people suffer generally because of Israel too
Edit: well guess I offended a bunch of people with this. Nice to see that we’re being no different to reddit here and just downvoting people we don’t agree with, even if that person isn’t being shitty about the opinion they’re expressing and isn’t claiming it’s true anyway, and not having an open discussion about the thing that’s been said
So we just don’t consider anything could be true unless we know for absolute sure it is? So we shouldn’t even entertain the idea that Epstein didn’t kill himself, as well as many other things? I understand that we shouldn’t go about throwing out theories and believing them completely without some solid evidence, but I think the other extreme of “epistemic hygiene” hinders us too. Certain things could turn out to be true and us ignoring suggestions of that earlier on could mean we don’t realise later. Again I’m not saying that the possibility I bring up in my original comment is likely or anything, just it wouldn’t surprise me really. There’s so many examples in recent years of powers distracting us from the bad things they’re doing with other things
Epistemic hygiene doesn’t require you to believe only things that are “absolutely true,” since that would exclude literally all empirical claims.
It does require you to proportion your beliefs to the evidence. Big claims require a lot of evidence. The idea that Epstein didn’t kill himself enjoys some degree of confidence (say, 75%) because of circumstantial evidence (not to mention motive and opportunity).
Ok so…how have I said anything that goes against that? I’ve not once said I believe it or that others should and that we should have solid evidence before we believe something. I like the throwing out philosophy terms you’re doing in order to try and talk down to me too
I wouldn’t be surprised if penguins ate the pope. However, I wouldn’t bring up the possibility that penguins have eaten the pope every time he gets mentioned (absent evidence).
Didn’t realise “plausible” was a synonym for ”true". Do you wanna stop strawmanning me or? And you are doing it to try and talk down to me, be real. You can be “precise” without using those terms. It has similar energy as someone weaponising psychology terms in a conflict in order to try and seem like the one in the right by virtue of being “more intelligent”
Not saying it’s definitely the case but the conspiracy minded part of me can’t help but notice the attack on the synagogue in Manchester was very conveniently timed around when the flotilla arrived in Israel. Could just be coincidence of course but we’ve seen what they’re capable of making happen. This would be very easy for them. And this isn’t to have any disrespect towards the victims of the attack, even if it was a false flag or whatever it doesn’t make it any less of a tragedy. Plenty of Jewish people suffer generally because of Israel too
Edit: well guess I offended a bunch of people with this. Nice to see that we’re being no different to reddit here and just downvoting people we don’t agree with, even if that person isn’t being shitty about the opinion they’re expressing and isn’t claiming it’s true anyway, and not having an open discussion about the thing that’s been said
We have enough conspiracy theories right now. Let’s stick to the facts and maintain some epistemic hygiene.
So we just don’t consider anything could be true unless we know for absolute sure it is? So we shouldn’t even entertain the idea that Epstein didn’t kill himself, as well as many other things? I understand that we shouldn’t go about throwing out theories and believing them completely without some solid evidence, but I think the other extreme of “epistemic hygiene” hinders us too. Certain things could turn out to be true and us ignoring suggestions of that earlier on could mean we don’t realise later. Again I’m not saying that the possibility I bring up in my original comment is likely or anything, just it wouldn’t surprise me really. There’s so many examples in recent years of powers distracting us from the bad things they’re doing with other things
Epistemic hygiene doesn’t require you to believe only things that are “absolutely true,” since that would exclude literally all empirical claims.
It does require you to proportion your beliefs to the evidence. Big claims require a lot of evidence. The idea that Epstein didn’t kill himself enjoys some degree of confidence (say, 75%) because of circumstantial evidence (not to mention motive and opportunity).
Ok so…how have I said anything that goes against that? I’ve not once said I believe it or that others should and that we should have solid evidence before we believe something. I like the throwing out philosophy terms you’re doing in order to try and talk down to me too
I wouldn’t be surprised if penguins ate the pope. However, I wouldn’t bring up the possibility that penguins have eaten the pope every time he gets mentioned (absent evidence).
Nice editing and erasing most of what you said in this comment. Realised you’ve been talking shit eh?
Didn’t realise “plausible” was a synonym for ”true". Do you wanna stop strawmanning me or? And you are doing it to try and talk down to me, be real. You can be “precise” without using those terms. It has similar energy as someone weaponising psychology terms in a conflict in order to try and seem like the one in the right by virtue of being “more intelligent”