UnitedCardists.com - The forum for Cardistry, Magic, Custom Decks and All Things Playing Cards.

Well, in my opinion they aren't done stripping rights - something that wouldn’t have happened if the court didn’t get stuffed with a bunch of yahoos hand picked by the most conservative lobby in our land - all thanks to this guy (the lump on the left)…. Having him for another term would have replaced more judges - and I think he wanted to go Putin on us and stay forever

Thinking about it, I should stop being against democracy (kidding of course - I will 'til I die) but in return you guys should actually do democracy and not let a bunch of yahoos rule your country.

Will this Tronald Dump run for the next election btw? I heared he wants to.

I hear tell of it - I’m sure we will get around to doing democracy again - we know we left it around here somewhere, we just can’t find it at the moment

Well you know what they say:

Democracy is the worst form of government.....except for all the others.


I hear that a lot of people that previously voted for Trump are just tired of him. Personally, I think we have too many politicians that are too old, too out of touch, and have been in their positions for far too long. I am totally in support of term limits for all of these guys.

Preach.

I find it so mind-boggling that the Supreme Court allow states to decide on abortion but not gun control. The SC overturned New York's attempt to restrict carrying concealed guns just before the Roe vs Wade ruling a day later so this got lost in the news cycle.

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/06/23/supreme ... carry.html

Not an American but I've heard of gun free zones and that several states have stricter laws than others. So I'd say there is still a lot for the federal states to decide.

Vice versa an American buddy of mine explained to me that the federal states are able to not give a smurf about the Supreme Court ruling. Similar to the Marihuana situation, as in it's officially illegal within the U.S. but some states have placed exceptions so that it is legal in e.g. Colorado.

GandalfPC wrote: ↑Sat Oct 29, 2022 9:41 amcitizens live in countries and are not responsible for the actions of their governments.

Who keeps the government running? Who is part of the army? Last time I checked citizens.

Who protests? Citizens.

They come in all shapes, sizes, and ideologies.

True. It's just not as simple as they are not responsible.

It’s also not as simple as saying they are.

People are individuals - and although simpler to paint them with a broad brush, such paintings lack important details.

Is a woman who is currently protesting at risk of her life in Iran responsible for the oppression she is under? How about one that protested earlier, the day the oppression came into being? How about one that was afraid for her life and didn’t protest? The one killed for protesting? Is it a different measure if they have children they fear leaving behind? Is it for us to judge from the safety of our freedoms?

We could certainly travel to Ukraine and fight along side them - if we do not, are we responsible? If we buy a pack of cards instead of sending that money to defend Ukraine are we responsible? I tend to think that we are at least as responsible as a Russian citizen who tries to avoid ending up in a Russian jail.

And what of the Russian who would be jailed for their activity but has not been caught, or the one who is in jail (or worse) - are they responsible? What if they care not what fate they suffer, but fear for their families lives? Responsible?


Knowing nothing about an artist other than that he is a Russian citizen, one can say that its even odds that they are just as responsible, and just as free of responsibility, as we are.

Odds are greater than zero that they are less responsible than we are, or that they are not responsible at all.

GandalfPC wrote: ↑Sat Oct 29, 2022 2:14 pmIt’s also not as simple as saying they are.

That wasn't my point. I just don't like taking the blame away completely but I'm confident that wasn't your point either. Everyone is responsible to a more or lesser degree. And you're 100% correct that ethnicity or heritage has nothing to do with it but solely the actions of every individual.

I think there is another related topic that has yet to be explored - propaganda and conspiracy theories. This might be framed within the bounds of a country like Russia, where state controlled media drives the narrative, or in countries with freedom of the press where certain outlets push the narrative - or from social media / web sources.

The question being - is a person responsible for believing misinformation?

This is not a simple question, and I am not coming at this from an angle of knowing the answer - but I feel it is an important topic to explore…

Certainly misinformation requires pushback - but does it require ostracizing - what is the path to the truth - does it permit forgiveness - and once resolved, are repeat occurrences as forgivable or is there a personal responsibility to be more discerning in the future…

I could go on with the questions, and fire off a few opinions, but I will pause there to let it be expounded upon first without tainting the pool

Well put Gandalf. I guess this question isn't really answered since Socrates asked Glaucon to imagine the famous cave with prisoners bound to watch the shadows on the wall.

Yes - it does seem somewhat intractable. Hopefully a new great philosopher will come along and “shed some light”, but it does simply seem to be more about human nature than anything else.

Guy Delisle's Journey to Pyongyang is an excellent window on how extreme state controlled media can get and how much the citizens can be brainwashed. 1984 in real life.

Even in my country where media has been getting more free and less controlled over the last 20 years, it is only in the urban areas that enjoy the access to alternative media that's not run by the govt. Rural areas with poor internet connection have little access to online media and rely on the free govt media on TV and Radio.

For nearly 60 years, the majority race have been bombarded by the former ruling party that only they can ensure the rights and development of the majority while demonizing other parties and race. So the rural folk will seldom get a chance to see and hear for themselves the complete story. It is slowly changing as their children get educated and see a different side. But that's dependent on them coming home and convincing their parents otherwise.

So it's hard to know just what to believe, when one is still stuck in the cave; unable to get the opportunity to get out, and all one sees are shadows cast by the puppet masters. Even with those who've left the cave will have a hard time convincing them otherwise. The recent vaccination and anti-vax debate storm shows as much.

Even worse, with all the fake news, one may think you've left the cave, but only in reality you're just going into a deeper cave!

I'd say it's important to understand that you simply don't know better. Like everyone thinks s/he knows better than the other person. I'd say if you ever feel like you know better, you start to be wrong - in regards to global situations. When it comes to e.g. whisky of course I know better than you .

You may know better than the other person, depending on the person and the particular bit in question at the time - but you most certainly will never know everything, and some of the things you know are certain to be wrong.

I don’t think you can ever really know something for sure. We as humans just decide what we think as most likely due to our world view and personal perception and choose to believe it as fact. Maybe what we do believe is a fact, but you can never prove it beyond reasonable doubt to someone else.

Sir Toddalot wrote: ↑Wed Nov 02, 2022 10:52 am I don’t think you can ever really know something for sure. We as humans just decide what we think as most likely due to our world view and personal perception and choose to believe it as fact. Maybe what we do believe is a fact, but you can never prove it beyond reasonable doubt to someone else.

This must be rebuked. As a compilation of information, most 'knowledge' is true, by education or experience. Objective knowledge can be shared by repeatable experiment. Subjective knowledge is a matter of personal anecdotes, such as witnessing infidelity.

ETA: I guess I'm not sure if your comment was only pertaining to 'political knowledge', in which case there really isn't much truth other than whether something is historically accurate.

Also, some things that we know via repeatable experiment may have underlying principles that we do not know - for example the true nature of gravity.

Another bit of science from the old days reminds us just how much science can change over time, as accepted facts upon which it are based change - here, the path of the planets when it was believed that the earth was at the center of everything.

GandalfPC wrote: ↑Wed Nov 02, 2022 12:13 pm Also, some things that we know via repeatable experiment may have underlying principles that we do not know - for example the true nature of gravity.

I actually had that exact example in my comment before I blew it up and simplified it.

One thing can be said to be true - I have never been accused of simplifying anything

Unless someone is omniscient, I don’t think we can definitely say something is true without a doubt. We can conclude that based all the the evidence and information we currently have, something is the most likely answer. But as has been demonstrated throughout time, perceived facts change, as our information changes. Common knowledge is proven wrong. We can’t say for certain what we currently believe to be facts now won’t be debunked in the future, but we can conclude what is most likely the truth, based on our current knowledge. Of course, this is all just philosophical mumble jumble. I really don’t know much philosophy, just enough to be dangerous.

Alain Aspect, John Clauser and Anton Zeilinger proved that the Universe is not locally real.

Deal with it.

That would explain a lot

I don't know. Their logic seemed tangled up.

The more you learn the less you know. Our universe is crazy.

Bradius wrote: ↑Wed Nov 02, 2022 5:32 pm I don't know. Their logic seemed tangled up.

Yeah - I didn’t mean to imply that they were correct

What is meant by locally real is not the same as the words mean in a general sense. It's a very specific meaning relating to quantum mechanics and entanglement.