I don’t know if I believe Bush was that good at acting. There are high Machiavellian types, Platonic sophism and misinformation, but I don’t think any are quite sure who are the leaders and who are the convenient idiots, but opportunism abounds. They fail to adopt game theory after the most prosperous methodology has been established and proven.
Edit: The most frustrating thing about this entire thread is that I wanted to have a conversation about implementing actual on the ground solutions to countering conspiracy theories and the response was to shut down the conversation.
In an attempt to answer my own question, maybe the solution to getting people to escape conspiracy theories is to avoid personal attacks (you’re Machiavelli) and other rhetorical devices and actually have a conversation divorced from ego about a topic.
That’s a non answer. I never said conspiratorial thinking was helping the world. (However, in the example given it appears that it may have.)
What I asked was how do we implement your solution. It’s all well and good to point out problems. But if that problem is unavoidable it becomes the cost of doing business. I take your non answer to mean you don’t have one. That’s fine. I don’t either. In the example given a good result was achieved via a less than ideal way.
While we wait for the way to implement your solution I am willing to accept getting innocent children vaccinated by any means possible.
Honestly, the situation we find ourselves in is because we applied your “solution” for decades while ignoring the long-term consequences of that kind of appeasement of illogical thinking.
This seems like a huge gamble if you’re a pharma in the vaccine space. Existing vaccines have great economies of scale and are very reliable revenue when uptake is high and consistent. Introducing skepticism that reduces the number of people getting vaccines (since RFK lacks any nuance) is a great way to shoot yourself in the foot. The new patent vaccine would need to maintain high uptake to recoup the R&D costs.
You’re also screwing a large group of billionaires to benefit a much smaller group of billionaires. Possible, but likely to make enemies.
deleted by creator
That fits typical Republican corruption scams
deleted by creator
I don’t know if I believe Bush was that good at acting. There are high Machiavellian types, Platonic sophism and misinformation, but I don’t think any are quite sure who are the leaders and who are the convenient idiots, but opportunism abounds. They fail to adopt game theory after the most prosperous methodology has been established and proven.
Wow, fighting conspiracy theories with conspiracy theories?
deleted by creator
I think it normalizes conspiratorial thinking. Better to teach proper critical thinking.
The best option is that which is possible.
How? A correct answer saves the world.
Edit: The most frustrating thing about this entire thread is that I wanted to have a conversation about implementing actual on the ground solutions to countering conspiracy theories and the response was to shut down the conversation.
In an attempt to answer my own question, maybe the solution to getting people to escape conspiracy theories is to avoid personal attacks (you’re Machiavelli) and other rhetorical devices and actually have a conversation divorced from ego about a topic.
If only there was a community for that?
How is conspiratorial thinking helping the world right now?
That’s a non answer. I never said conspiratorial thinking was helping the world. (However, in the example given it appears that it may have.)
What I asked was how do we implement your solution. It’s all well and good to point out problems. But if that problem is unavoidable it becomes the cost of doing business. I take your non answer to mean you don’t have one. That’s fine. I don’t either. In the example given a good result was achieved via a less than ideal way.
While we wait for the way to implement your solution I am willing to accept getting innocent children vaccinated by any means possible.
Honestly, the situation we find ourselves in is because we applied your “solution” for decades while ignoring the long-term consequences of that kind of appeasement of illogical thinking.
What solution? I said I don’t have one.
Machiavelli would be proud.
Can’t tell if you mean that as a good or bad thing.
God. Damn. I’m all but certain I read that post.
That actually finally makes sense. I think you’ve solved the mystery.
This seems like a huge gamble if you’re a pharma in the vaccine space. Existing vaccines have great economies of scale and are very reliable revenue when uptake is high and consistent. Introducing skepticism that reduces the number of people getting vaccines (since RFK lacks any nuance) is a great way to shoot yourself in the foot. The new patent vaccine would need to maintain high uptake to recoup the R&D costs.
You’re also screwing a large group of billionaires to benefit a much smaller group of billionaires. Possible, but likely to make enemies.