Huh? Did you respond to the wrong user?I’m not OP, I don’t go out talking at people at work.

All of my friends are already pretty much on the same page more or less, it’d be hard to be friends with someone who is against human rights or doesn’t care about such things as I’m a minority.

The question i posed in my comment was about a societal scale: what do you do to reach a disengaged electorate or an electorate that has no desire to know the truth and is not actively seeking it out whatsoever, instead believing things that re completely transparently false.

Because as it stands, the current strategy of content online or in traditional media simply ends up preaching to the choir, the lectures containing truth end up reaching only those who seek them out and as such already have an allegiance to the truth and likely at least to some extent agree with them, or see them as epistemologically well justified beliefs imperically and/or logically.

I personally rather obviously can’t make friends of like 50% of the population of a country for instance, so it’s not really a workable solution lol and I don’t think that’s what you meant.

So how do you show those people who believe transparently false things because it suits them the truth and teach them to want to seek out truth and want to believe the truth and to spot falsehoods and not be swayed by rhem, when those people have absolutely no interest in such things?

And if you can’t, what do you do then? Because these people will literally destroy a democratic society if given the chance.

That’s 100% true and a fault in OP’s attempt, but the broader question remains, if some people don’t seek it out, what do you do then?

Yes but like exercise, intellectual exercise feels good too. The question is why do some people not do it.

Yeah, but what do you do when a good chunk of the population doesn’t go ‘seeking something out’, yet vote and influence the lives of those who do anyway?

All anyone wants to do is lecture me about how they are right, and I am wrong if I think different than them

The only relevant question is - are you wrong?

Is your take actually valid? Based on sound imperical data? Is not fallacious? Does your reasoning stand up to scrutiny? Is it fact, or a belief? Is it a justified belief?

Ultimately you shouldn’t need to be coddled if you have any allegiance to the truth.

It’s one thing if a 3-year old gets 2+2 wrong. It’s another when it’s a 33 year old. Would you waste energy on that, or would you assume that the 33-year old doesn’t care enough to bother no matter what approach is used?

The unfortunate reality is that democracy as a vehicle for progress is a failure because not enough people have an allegiance to the truth, nor have the basic epistemological tools for determining what’s knowledge, what’s belief, what’s a hypothesis, what’s theory or what’s valid evidence or any idea of what the scientific method even is, or what an axiom is etc.

They favour their delusions (I don’t mean religion specifically) over truth.

Idk I listen to politics lectures all the time, most of which I don’t fully agree with, many I disagree with outright, listening to other takes, especially opposing ones helps me scrutinize my own reasoning and critically analyze what’s what.

It’s not really the lecturer’s fault he was lecturing, if he was right and so he should be lecturing others on truth. Much like any subject really.

This idea that all opinions are equal are how we ended up in a post-truth world.

Thought-terminating clichés of “everyone likes different things” or “people believe different things” are not just signs of a lazy intellect, they are the harbingers of our doom.

You can have beliefs that aren’t facts, in fact - you have to, but you can’t just believe whatever, you need to be able to justify it, and to do that you need to understand logic, you need to understand evidence, you need to understand the scientific method and how to reason.

According to me it means what it means. You’re free to look that up on sites like wikipedia.org and google.com and as well as in the dictionary, you can then read papers and theses and essays to your heart’s content on “national socialism” or “Naziism” or “fascism” or any number of related concepts.

Lol you’re either trolling or are a giant moron who thinks basically that:

if X is most famous for Y, then Y must be the definition of X, which is blatantly untrue in most if not all situations, Steve Jobs is famous for “creating the iPhone” but he never did that, nor is the definition of “iPhone creator” - “Steve Jobs”. It doesn’t even make grammatical sense.

Even on like a blokey common sense level Nazis weren’t even most famous for the holocaust to the average room temp IQ ignoramus, they were most famous for WW2.

Epistemology isn’t jeapoardy and words have meanings that you can easily look up in your free time on websites like google.com and Wikipedia.org or even a dictionary of your choice to start with, all without wasting time of commenters here.

Blocked.

Sure, but with normies blaming the downfall of civilization on content sort algorithms I do wonder how much if any value they add, and whether the ability to gather such information will inevitably lead to other cancer like ads and monetization.

Looks nice! I Def prefer the Jerboa style, reminds me of Relay for Reddit.

But the last thing I want is some “smart” algorithm I’m not gonna lie, the linear post sort is the best part about Lemmy. I don’t want to ever see “Recommended for you” and “see also” or any of that corpo crap again and it’s nice to not have to filter it all out by tinkering with settings cough disabling watch history on YouTube cough anymore.

Scaled is as smart as algos for content should get.

Second battle with Vergil in DMC 3, Agni & Rudra in DMC 3 and somehow not as hard to beat but incredibly hard to beat well is the Shadow, Griffon & Nightmare battle from DMC5. Beating it on the DMD difficulty gave me that game “”“PTSD”“” where Stage 18 became “that level” to me haha.

Child accounts are now allowed to adjust the brightness of the screen.

For some reason I’m imagining a baby being blinded by a really bright screen with no way to adjust it.

Poor baby!

Biden’s admin :

1. orchestrated the fastest rollout of free vaccines to Americans in response to an awful pandemic

2. he strengthened Obamacare,

3. he got inflation under control,

4. he forgave fuckloads of student debt,

5. fixed the economy out of a recession that would’ve made the current cost of living look like paradise in less capable hands,

6. cracked down on big tech monopolies,

7. cracked down on junk fees/charges, cracked down on union-busting,

8. did the legwork to ensure creation of jobs and an entire industry’s worth will be brought home,

9. empowered federal agencies to monitor and regulate AI,

10. passed bipartisan bills for $1.2 trillion investments in building and replacing crumbling US infrastructure,

11. he strengthened privacy regulations and last but not least

12. literally gave people free money.

Did I mention he reduced violent crime, strengthened gun control, made birth control OTC, and that he did all of these broadly popular things alongside protections for minorities like trans people while dealing with every other branch of government and the Supreme Court being actively hostile?

Things are fucking awful for sure, but they could be a helluva lot worse, and Biden and his admin is genuinely to thank for some of that.

What was actually the problem with Biden again? That he’s just kind of old or like, not a very charismatic guy or something?

Who the fuck cares if Biden mumbles, an ideal president should be a bookish nerdy guy with strong principles and belief in something who grew up to be able to tell whats baloney and what isn’t so he can hire competent, genuine people who will give him good advice he can implement.

So you vote in another old, barely coherent guy but this one is also a corrupt racist convict backed by oligarchs and probably also Egypt and definitely Russia, who may or may not turn the country into a dictatorial clown show and who also made everything worse last time and embarrassed the nation on the global stage?

Because what - he dances funny? Makes fun of veterans? Says Obama founded ISIS? Promoted horse dewormer as a cure?

Or are you just nostalgic about the Walmart toilet paper brawls?

What’s next, he’s gonna get shirtless and ride a bear too?

I’m starting to think you Americans have genuine brainrot.

If you want Left-Wing change (better employee protections, less inequality, affordable housing and rent, less exploitation, green policy, minority rights etc), you vote for the most Left-Wing choice you have and you vote hard and you do it over and over for a decade or so, then they get comfortable and brave and the more leftie factions can sway centrists in the party without worrying about losing elections.

For a local example see the state of California, their Dems are way to the left of the Centre-Right that the national Dems occupy, and that’s because they don’t have to worry about being voted out and can afford to not please some of the electorate.

Hey according to some that’s okay, because at least they know what a woman is:

That’s okay I’m sure her fellow “women’s rights” defenders wouldn’t do something awful like make fun of Malala’s experiences: