The fact that lies can be repeated has no relevance on my position that this sentiment is repeated because it's true. If you want to argue with the statement, produce an argument instead of an unrelated sarcastic comment.
So you claim that something being repeatedly posted is a useful signal to determine if it's true, but you only apply it to something that you already believe is true.
But it somehow isn't a useful signal once it's something you personally don't know is true or believe is false. How does that make any sense?
Sounds like textbook confirmation bias. Should be included as a real life example in the definitions.
Can't argue with that, works for people that consume Fox News and Breitbart.
The fact that lies can be repeated has no relevance on my position that this sentiment is repeated because it's true. If you want to argue with the statement, produce an argument instead of an unrelated sarcastic comment.
So you claim that something being repeatedly posted is a useful signal to determine if it's true, but you only apply it to something that you already believe is true.
But it somehow isn't a useful signal once it's something you personally don't know is true or believe is false. How does that make any sense?
Sounds like textbook confirmation bias. Should be included as a real life example in the definitions.
4 replies →