lonegardener said:Look, I’m no expert here. It’s entirely possible you’re right; I have no way to verify that objectively. The point is, Spitzer claims it’s still possible (if I may add, he also mentions it's "extremely difficult" and "not worth the effort"); I’m simply reacting to your absolute assertion that it’s "impossible."
Honestly, that's a weak argument, LOL. Maybe he'll feel "ashamed" about his role back in '73, too? It's pointless. Who knows what you'll be embarrassed about 30 years from now? (Or me, for that matter.)
Yes, you are. You might claim your bias doesn't affect your judgment, but you can't deny that you have one. Besides, I have one too.
That isn't a fact; it's just a politically correct postulate. For that to be a "fact," you'd need a study that tracks, say, 200 random people over a 10-year period and shows exactly what you're claiming in every single case. Do you have a reference to a study like that or anything similar? As far as I know, those kinds of studies aren't even conducted; what you're describing is just an "educated guess."
Does the reverse apply too? 😍
True, it’s a bit set in stone and a bit fluid—it really depends on the context of the debate we're having. 😈
Exactly. There’s no room for believing something is impossible just because it hasn't been proven impossible yet. If you claim it can't be done, I’d love to see a reference "proving" that it is literally impossible. Honestly, I don't see how you'd even go about proving that—it reminds me of trying to prove that all swans are white.
I know exactly what Spitzer claims because I actually follow his debates. And trust me, other big-name experts say something totally different. They don't take him seriously and they definitely don't think he's right.
You can't just cling to one guy just because his opinion fits your narrative.
Quentin:
| That's a total non-sequitur, LOL. What, is he gonna be 'ashamed' of his role back in '73? Please. Who knows what you'll be embarrassed about in 30 years? (Or me, probably.) |
It was said in terms of being wrong and flawed... just like his own views, for that matter.
Quentin:
| Sure you can. You can claim your bias doesn't affect your judgment, but you can't deny you have one. We all do. |
Yeah, sure. You'll call me biased because I'm gay, and I'll call you biased because your prejudices make it impossible for you to use logic since everything is driven by emotion... and then we just end the debate because nobody is objective? Yeah, I'm not playing that game.😍
Quentin:
| That's not a fact, it's just a political postulate. For that to be a 'fact,' you'd need a study tracking, say, 200 people over 10 years that proves exactly what you're saying. Got a citation for a study like that? As far as I know, those aren't even done; what you're doing is just an 'educated guess.' |
A study like that is impossible to pull off, but it's based on case study facts. Sure, there are gaps, but there are statistical methods to account for all those variables. I don't know if anyone's specifically done it that way, but my stance is backed by experts way more qualified than me or anyone else in this thread.
Quentin:
| Yeah, it's a bit rigid, a bit fluid—depends on how you need it to be for whatever argument you're making... 😈 |
Actually, it depends on what we're talking about. To me, it's like sex. Your sex is set at birth and you can't just change it later to be something else. Even the behaviorists admitted they were lost on that one.
Quentin:
| Exactly. You can't just claim something is impossible without proof. If you're gonna insist it's a dead end, show me the actual reference proving it’s literally impossible. Honestly, I don't even see how you'd "prove" that—it's like trying to prove every single swan in existence is white. |
Look, in science—which is what you're leaning on here—not everything is strictly proven through empirical data (some stuff just can't be, and some shouldn't be), but that's why we build theories and draw conclusions based on probability and availability. It's way more solid than just holding onto implicit biases... though there are people on this forum who could give you a much better lecture on actual science and the scientific method.