I understand. You know I understand that. You know I hate that. I don’t think this has anything to do with “questioning the narrative”. It’s about giving people a “logical” way of questioning the truth by portraying himself as only “questioning” the conspiracy.
-
-
Replying to @ElleWest26 @HPluckrose and
It’s a way of distancing himself from the people asserting the conspiracy while also giving validity to people questioning the conspiracy. Can you try to see what I am saying?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @ElleWest26 @ConceptualJames and
I do see that but I also think that not being seen as doing that would require not questioning things like this and letting only ideologically-motivated conspiracy theorists do so. I'm more worried about that.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @HPluckrose @ElleWest26 and
I took some small issue with Bret's tweet but I also took issue with many of the responses. My issue was a bit separate, though, in that I don't like the pragmatic reasons given for "entertaining" conspiracy theories. I think we should just treat them like any other propositions.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @Intrinsic29 @HPluckrose and
i.e. if they seem like they have low prior probability, we should reject them until we have better reason not to and if they don't, we should entertain them. The idea of entertaining them or explicitly not entertaining them based on what social effects might happen loses me.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Intrinsic29 @HPluckrose and
James Lindsay Retweeted Bret Weinstein
Meanwhile, it's made far more clear.https://twitter.com/BretWeinstein/status/1055914971014426624?s=19 …
James Lindsay added,
Bret WeinsteinVerified account @BretWeinsteinNonsense. I'll gladly acknowledge that wild speculation about conspiracy has serious costs. That is obvious. What divides us is the wisdom of shutting down anyone who entertains a hypothesis based on conspiracy--that facile solution makes conspiracy safe and tyranny inevitable. https://twitter.com/donmoyn/status/1055893083370348544 …1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @ConceptualJames @HPluckrose and
Yeah I don't like the idea of just shutting down conspiracy theories for pragmatic reasons either. Especially with a president in office who's all but completely unhinged. The likelihood of the Bush administration doing 9/11 might be a lot lower than Trump's dumb ass trying it.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Intrinsic29 @ConceptualJames and
I'm part joking but I think the point is sound.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Intrinsic29 @ConceptualJames and
What would you do about this one? I fell on the conspiracy theory side with it, I must admit but I had an argument for that which was language analysis!https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/do-not-walk-your-dog-here-muslims-dont-like-dogs-police-investigate-provocative-sign-in-london-park-9460061.html …
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @HPluckrose @ConceptualJames and
I'm not sure. Could be an individual Muslim who doesn't like dogs, some anti-Islam group wanting to cause division, an individual extremist who doesn't like dogs, or a group actually trying to intimidate people. I feel like there's be more if it was an organized group though.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
I think it was the second option because of the language. "Muslims don't like dogs" is what is said about Muslims and something that upsets Brits. A Muslim would say that dogs are unclean, cite it and demand respect for this.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.