Welcome to the Free Talk Live bulletin board system!
This board is closed to new users and new posts.  Thank you to all our great mods and users over the years.  Details here.
185859 Posts in 9829 Topics by 1371 Members
Latest Member: cjt26
Home Help
+  The Free Talk Live BBS
|-+  Free Talk Live
| |-+  The Show
| | |-+  What's the Harm
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Down

Author Topic: What's the Harm  (Read 10356 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

fatcat

  • Guest
Re: What's the Harm
« Reply #30 on: December 19, 2009, 05:01:31 PM »

So what if someone wants to go to a psychic surgeon, I'm not going to use force to stop them. When they don't get better, that psychic gets a huge black mark on their reputation.

Except retards who don't understand what science is don't have the same idea.

Just look at all the losers who think magnet therapy works for them, and they in turn give false hope to other losers.

We need people like Scott precisely because people won't just naturally suss out bunk medicine because people like Sam aren't looking at evidence, they're going with what feels right and warping reality to fit.

Susceptible people will just absorb bullshit people like Sam pump out like a sponge, but people

While you might say they deserve it if they don't inspect the service properly, alot of their reputation is coming from other suckers.

If they listen to critical dissent from people like Scott and still decide bullshit medicine is for them, then fine, but ignorance on its own isn't a reason not to tell people, its THE reason to tell people.
Logged

BobRobertson

  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 929
    • View Profile
Re: What's the Harm
« Reply #31 on: December 19, 2009, 05:19:08 PM »

Except retards who don't understand what science is don't have the same idea.

I refuse to rationalize the entire leviathan state just because there are stupid people.

Let them die.

The simple fact is that there are, today, uncountable self-help books, web sites, religions and seminars available for people who want guidance. I see no reason that such private efforts cannot solve at least as many problems as having the State does, and without creating all the problems of having the State.
Logged
"I regret that I am now to die in the belief that the useless sacrifice of themselves by the generation of 1776 to acquire self-government and happiness to their country is to be thrown away by the unwise and unworthy passions of their sons, and that my only consolation is to be that I live not to weep over it."
-- Thomas Jefferson, April 26th 1820

Diogenes The Cynic

  • Cynic. Pessimist. Skeptic. Jerk.
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3727
    • View Profile
Re: What's the Harm
« Reply #32 on: December 19, 2009, 06:28:31 PM »

Eating baking soda isn't going to harm anyone.  It is retarded and pointless though.

Unless you're running cross country. In that case, it prevents a buildup of lactic acid.
Interesting, never heard that before and I was very competitive in XC racing and track in High School.  I'll do some research on that now.

I did some reasearch back when I was on the crew team in college. About a tablespoon of Sodium bi-carb is only really usefull when doing short term intense activity and it only lasts a couple of seconds in about 10 min 'race'.  Any more than a tablespoon and you are looking at some severe nausia cramps and diarriah.

I tried it once and saw some minor improvement in my 2k time but felt sick afterward. Your best bet really is to suck it up and actually train at your anabolic threashold to increase your tolerance. This way you can go longer and harder before you start to feel the burn of lactic acid.


My mistake then.
Logged
I am looking for an honest man. -Diogenes The Cynic

Dude, I thought you were a spambot for like a week. You posted like a spambot. You failed the Turing test.

                                -Dennis Goddard

AL the Inconspicuous

  • Guest
Re: What's the Harm
« Reply #33 on: December 20, 2009, 09:16:55 AM »

When someone says something on a forum without an explicit quote box, it is implied that they're responding to the post above theirs, in that case your claim that you're not advocating force.  No truly skeptical person should believe you.

Why? What [evidence] do you have? This is a huge red herring, since I am only talking about having factual information on which to make your [lives] decisions.

I think most of the problems in the world come from the mistake you are now making: failure to property attribute the burden of proof.  I don't have to buy what you're selling AND I don't have to prove that you're wrong.  Deal with it.
Logged

fatcat

  • Guest
Re: What's the Harm
« Reply #34 on: December 20, 2009, 10:21:17 AM »

Except retards who don't understand what science is don't have the same idea.

I refuse to rationalize the entire leviathan state just because there are stupid people.

Let them die.

The simple fact is that there are, today, uncountable self-help books, web sites, religions and seminars available for people who want guidance. I see no reason that such private efforts cannot solve at least as many problems as having the State does, and without creating all the problems of having the State.

Who said shit about the state?

Thats right, no one.

no one is having the argument you want to be having.

We're talking about smart pro-science people like Scott trying to counter dumbass anti-science/pro-mysticism from people like Sam, and the issues that surround that.

Just because we should have a free market means people shouldn't be critical of certain ideas?
« Last Edit: December 20, 2009, 10:23:39 AM by fatcat »
Logged

AL the Inconspicuous

  • Guest
Re: What's the Harm
« Reply #35 on: December 20, 2009, 12:13:49 PM »

Critical on a personal level - yes.  But most people don't come to this forum to say "my Aunt Sally did something stupid", they come here to discuss politics, and the overwhelming majority of "people are too stupid to think for themselves" stories come off as pro-regulation in the minds of the mainstream audience.  Going as far as to make a whole Web-site like WhatsTheHarm.net and then claiming not to do this to promote regulation is very improbable.  A person who's truly capable of critical thinking would see that most those costs aren't objectively valid (I could argue that baseball is a waste of time and money), and that those harms are simply dwarfed by the harm of national governments, which a site like this does in effect strengthen, deliberately or not.

« Last Edit: December 20, 2009, 12:17:10 PM by Alex Libman »
Logged

LordMarius

  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 253
  • The only Norwegian freemarketeer
    • View Profile
Re: What's the Harm
« Reply #36 on: December 20, 2009, 01:02:08 PM »

I wonder how many people science has killed.

Conventional medicine is dangerous, the only thing that is worse is the alternatives.
Logged

BobRobertson

  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 929
    • View Profile
Re: What's the Harm
« Reply #37 on: December 20, 2009, 05:03:31 PM »

Critical on a personal level - yes.  But most people don't come to this forum to say "my Aunt Sally did something stupid", they come here to discuss politics, and the overwhelming majority of "people are too stupid to think for themselves" stories come off as pro-regulation in the minds of the mainstream audience.

It could very well be that there was no intention for promoting regulation on the part of someone saying "the majority of people are too stupid to think for themselves", however that is the logical conclusion of such a statement.

There will always be people who do stupid things. The only way to stop them is to order them not to do the stupid thing, and some of them will react to that order by trying to do the stupid thing before they CAN be stopped. Those who can be informed, persuaded, even shamed into doing the "right" thing do not require the state at all, just as those who are already  doing the "right" thing do not need the state.

So either people are left to make those choices for themselves, right or wrong, or they must be coerced into doing what someone thinks is "right" for them. Once that line of coercion is crossed, the entire leviathan state is rationalized.
« Last Edit: December 21, 2009, 08:15:36 AM by BobRobertson »
Logged
"I regret that I am now to die in the belief that the useless sacrifice of themselves by the generation of 1776 to acquire self-government and happiness to their country is to be thrown away by the unwise and unworthy passions of their sons, and that my only consolation is to be that I live not to weep over it."
-- Thomas Jefferson, April 26th 1820

Andy

  • Verbose.
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2722
  • Ask me later.
    • View Profile
    • My Blawg
Re: What's the Harm
« Reply #38 on: December 20, 2009, 10:17:49 PM »

Fuck you guys. Srsly.

Just another example of the most absurd things "pro-liberty" people do, try to shut people up because they think the truth will make people demand government.

Quote
Going as far as to make a whole Web-site like WhatsTheHarm.net and then claiming not to do this to promote regulation is very improbable.

I don't think scott made the website.

Also, why the fuck should I care if scott would like to see more regulation that's not relevant, he's right and your attempt to distract from that is transparent.

Quote
The simple fact is that there are, today, uncountable self-help books, web sites, religions and seminars available for people who want guidance. I see no reason that such private efforts cannot solve at least as many problems as having the State does, and without creating all the problems of having the State.

There are also counter productive private efforts like FTL, which scott is critiquing in a private effort.

Scott in Winnipeg

  • FTL AMPlifier Silver
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 321
    • View Profile
Re: What's the Harm
« Reply #39 on: December 20, 2009, 10:49:22 PM »

and the overwhelming majority of "people are too stupid to think for themselves" stories come off as pro-regulation in the minds of the mainstream audience. 

And I didn't say that, not do I ever, since I don't think that. BUT, many people aren't science literate past a very menial level (not that I am a genius or anything, science is just a hobby of mine) so I'm trying to do a little bit that is pro-science.

If someone wants to believe that the Universe has something in store for them aka Law of Attraction, fine, that isn't a harmful belief as far as I can tell. BUT saying that people shouldn't get vaccines and promoting "natural" cures and the like IS dangerous and has direct harm, that is my concern.

BTW, whatstheharm.net is not my website. And I don't see anything on there that promotes regulation outrighjt, the idea is to promote critical thinking when it comes to health, since most of the items there are about health.
Logged

Rillion

  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6804
    • View Profile
Re: What's the Harm
« Reply #40 on: December 20, 2009, 11:58:06 PM »

Fundamentally, I think that the problem is that since the majority of science is government-funded, and there are a lot of scientific studies that private companies have no incentive to support (why should AT&T care how many angler fish there are in the Mariana Trench?), science is viewed as inherently suspect and a waste of money.  By its very nature, science does not directly lead to profit.  Most avenues of education which are not related to sales and marketing, in fact, do not directly lead to profit.  It's hard to imagine that in a truly free market, anyone would have the financial incentive to conduct a study showing that acupuncture (for example) is bullshit.  Selling bullshit makes you a great deal more in cash than debunking it.  Is there any doubt about that?  I don't think so.  

How does a libertarian philosophy solve this?  Well, that's a problem.  And the fact that this issue exists is why libertarians so often are science deniers as well-- they figure that the easy way around dealing with the problems that science presents is to deny the science.  Denying reality in favor of ideology is, and always has been, sloppy thinking.  
« Last Edit: December 21, 2009, 10:17:57 AM by Rillion »
Logged

BobRobertson

  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 929
    • View Profile
Re: What's the Harm
« Reply #41 on: December 21, 2009, 08:25:18 AM »

If someone wants to believe that the Universe has something in store for them aka Law of Attraction, fine, that isn't a harmful belief as far as I can tell. BUT saying that people shouldn't get vaccines and promoting "natural" cures and the like IS dangerous and has direct harm, that is my concern.

And they believe it isn't dangerous. So, you promote your opinion, they promote theirs, and everyone else makes up their own mind.

The problem I see here is your assertion that the expression of _their_ opinion, and I quote, "IS dangerous and has direct harm".

Why isn't your opinion "dangerous and has direct harm"?

Quote
the idea is to promote critical thinking when it comes to health, since most of the items there are about health.

Here's the problem as I see it: Coercion.

Expressing your opinion, urging people to examine the available information and making up their own minds while (of course) hoping that they will come to the same conclusions as you, that's not coercion, that's persuasion.

Requiring medical procedures through force of law, even if it's "for your own good", that's coercion.

You want to see a bunch of people getting vaccinations for their kids? Then let a few die of those preventable diseases and see people flocking to your banner. Let people experience the results of choice, and you will see a lot more responsible behavior.
Logged
"I regret that I am now to die in the belief that the useless sacrifice of themselves by the generation of 1776 to acquire self-government and happiness to their country is to be thrown away by the unwise and unworthy passions of their sons, and that my only consolation is to be that I live not to weep over it."
-- Thomas Jefferson, April 26th 1820

fatcat

  • Guest
Re: What's the Harm
« Reply #42 on: December 21, 2009, 09:01:17 AM »

If someone wants to believe that the Universe has something in store for them aka Law of Attraction, fine, that isn't a harmful belief as far as I can tell. BUT saying that people shouldn't get vaccines and promoting "natural" cures and the like IS dangerous and has direct harm, that is my concern.

And they believe it isn't dangerous. So, you promote your opinion, they promote theirs, and everyone else makes up their own mind.

The problem I see here is your assertion that the expression of _their_ opinion, and I quote, "IS dangerous and has direct harm".

Why isn't your opinion "dangerous and has direct harm"?

Quote
the idea is to promote critical thinking when it comes to health, since most of the items there are about health.

Here's the problem as I see it: Coercion.

Expressing your opinion, urging people to examine the available information and making up their own minds while (of course) hoping that they will come to the same conclusions as you, that's not coercion, that's persuasion.

Requiring medical procedures through force of law, even if it's "for your own good", that's coercion.

You want to see a bunch of people getting vaccinations for their kids? Then let a few die of those preventable diseases and see people flocking to your banner. Let people experience the results of choice, and you will see a lot more responsible behavior.

Dude, everyone on this forum agrees government should get out of medicine, you're trying to find an argument where there isn't one.

Scott isn't saying that promoting bad medical advice IS like harming someone and should therefore be illegal, but that it leads to direct harm and should therefore be strongly apposed with free speech. Theres no need to frame this in pro liberty/anti liberty because everyones on the same page as far as thats concerned.

As far as "once a few people die then people will realize which medicines are bullshit and which are not" goes, this simply isn't the case.

You're assuming people are rational. If it were the case, peoples deaths would have already warned people off bad choices, then there would be no more cancer sufferers wasting money on magnets, non of them buying healing crystals or going to psychic healers or faith healers.

All of these "alternative" treatments are empirically much worse at curing cancer and extending your life than traditional chemo/radiotherapy/surgery.

People don't shun these conventional, proven treatments because they've made a rational choice on what works better
, they shun them namely for two (emotional) reasons.

1. Chemotherapy, radiotherapy both have very nasty side effects people don't want to endure, if they can bullshit themselves that the "cure is worse than the cancer", then they can free up some dissonance to follow unproven alternative bullshit. Surgery is also risky, and theres a chance you can die and that it won't do much to extend your life.

2. Often, even with the best chemotherapy, radiotherapy and surgery, prognosis is bad for certain cancers. If you've got severe pancreatic/lung/bone cancer, and doctors are telling you, even with the best treatment your probably only going to live for another 5 years, its much easier to listen to the hacks telling you that "traditional medicine" is harmful, and that theres an easy cure the scientific establishment doesn't want you to know about.

After all, the "scientific establishment" has effectively sentenced you to death, and if you only have a couple of years left, its pretty easy to grasp at straws, especially if you have a head full of "science can't explain everything/science is just another religion"

Unfortunately, the "let idiots die" attitude, doesn't take into account the fact that alot of people who fall for bullshit treatments, aren't normally irrational, they're just desperate, and as a result they waste money, and often ignore better treatments, and knock years off their life as a result.

There are countless assholes who make their buck from persuading people to ignore "conventional", in favor of their special treatment that can so easily cure you

Even though "conventional" treatments have doubled, and in some cases tripled cancer survival rates in the last 30 years.

Of the two quacks i linked to, one says that cancer is caused by "psychic shock", and that its chemo and radiotherapy that kill people with cancer, and that if you resolve your "psychic shock" then your body will heal itself.

The other claims cancer is a fungus and can be cured by bicarbonate of soda.

If this shit seems like a joke, take a look at some of the cancer forums where people are actually putting their hopes into this shit, then take a look at the people who've opted against chemo, radiotherapy and surgery, and died shortly afterwards.

They're like assholes selling big dick pills, except 1000 times worse because they're persuading desperate people to make a scientifically unsound choices which will shorten their life. Not only this but its self perpetuating. Once someone has a few people suckered, they can use their testimony as "proof" it works. And this all goes into a largery societal trend of fundamental misunderstanding of what science is.

The same attitude that backs "science can't explain everything", and "you can get scientists to say anything", is the same attitude that people draw upon when making these bunk scientific decisions.

The quacks are at the height of cargo cultism, they use percentages like scientists do, they use sciency sounding names like scientists do, and most people can't tell the difference, because they don't actually understand what science is.

The same retards who bitch about "blind trust" in scientists, are the same assholes who use bullshit authority arguments like X% of doctors wouldn't use chemotherapy if they got cancer, X% of doctors wouldn't give their children vaccines.

The only thing thats gonna make people make better choices is more informed discussion on the scientific method and its place in all our lives, and that goes for whether theres a free market or not.
Logged

BobRobertson

  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 929
    • View Profile
Re: What's the Harm
« Reply #43 on: December 21, 2009, 09:20:36 AM »

You're assuming people are rational.

No, actually I'm not.

I'm saying that the survivors will be more rational. If for no other reason that the process of elimination.
Logged
"I regret that I am now to die in the belief that the useless sacrifice of themselves by the generation of 1776 to acquire self-government and happiness to their country is to be thrown away by the unwise and unworthy passions of their sons, and that my only consolation is to be that I live not to weep over it."
-- Thomas Jefferson, April 26th 1820

Scott in Winnipeg

  • FTL AMPlifier Silver
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 321
    • View Profile
Re: What's the Harm
« Reply #44 on: December 21, 2009, 11:29:13 AM »

Here's the problem as I see it: Coercion.

Expressing your opinion, urging people to examine the available information and making up their own minds while (of course) hoping that they will come to the same conclusions as you, that's not coercion, that's persuasion.

Requiring medical procedures through force of law, even if it's "for your own good", that's coercion.



Have I advocated coersion anywhere in this topic? NO. So why do some folks keep coming back to that? I'm not talking about that at all! I'm talking about education. And it's not my "opinion", it's science based medicine, vs. quack based medicine.

You want to see a bunch of people getting vaccinations for their kids? Then let a few die of those preventable diseases and see people flocking to your banner. Let people experience the results of choice, and you will see a lot more responsible behavior.

That's already starting to happen. This website is tracking vaccine preventable deaths in the U.S.
http://www.jennymccarthybodycount.com

Yet the quackery continues, so the "let them die off" theory doesn't seem to be working. Besides, people don't need to "die off", they can have effective medical treatments right now and live.
« Last Edit: December 21, 2009, 11:34:58 AM by Scott in Winnipeg »
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Up
+  The Free Talk Live BBS
|-+  Free Talk Live
| |-+  The Show
| | |-+  What's the Harm

// ]]>

Page created in 0.028 seconds with 34 queries.