Cats, ranting, other
Apr. 26th, 2004 12:21 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
thebratqueenI've decided that when Luna purrs she's like a little Vespa. Which is appropriate, I guess, given the Italian name. Now all she needs to do is ride herself around the house and go "Ciao". ("Miao"?)
Anyhoo...
You know, I've been Tivoing Penn & Teller's new season of Bullshit and I watched last season too and man is this starting to turn into a masochistic thing for me. See, the thing is I'm on their side for the most part, but when proving their point they use the same bullshit tactics that the people they're trying to disprove use. How is that a winning strategy exactly?
See the thing that drives me nuts is that they'll point fingers at the opposition and call them on the carpet for using biased studies or unchecked facts, but then they turn around and do the exact same thing.
For example, in the last episode about legalizing drug use Penn & Teller cited statistics that had no reference to let us know who did that study, cited stats from people who are obviously biased (The guy from a pro-pot organization has studies that show pot isn't a gateway drug? Gee, who would've thunk it?), cited limited stats in rebuttal to something that sounded general (California statistics about traffic accidents when the man talking seemed to be talking about stats for America as a whole), and then topped it all off with non-sequiturs and strawmen (One guy says drug use isn't harmless because it hurts the family of the user. P&T counter with sappy music and yelling at the guy for wanting to deny a dying boy the right to use pot to ease his pain. Uh - not his argument guys. Not by a long shot.)
And the thing that especially gets me is that for the most part I'm on their side! I agree that pot isn't a gateway drug. But you don't use someone from a pro-pot organization to prove that! You show stats from a third party place which shows that the majority of pot users don't go on to other things. You mock the opposition savagely for the post hoc ergo propter hoc reasoning and then throw in that bit about tobacco and alcohol, which I'll at least grant was a good point of theirs.
And you don't tell someone who's arguing about the harm drug use does to families that they're mean mean mean and want to hurt little boys with cancer. You point out that drug addiction harms families just as any addiction harms families, and that if you're outlawing drugs for everyone because of what drug addiction does then you need to outlaw alcohol and gambling right along with it. Then you point out that you know morphine isn't exactly a drug that's without its addiction pitfalls, but if we're happy to give that to patients to help ease their pain then why not give pot to patients for the exact same purpose?
See? It doesn't have to be that hard.
And the stats - the stats! ARGH! They cited studies that ended in 1999! That's five years ago! Either show something current or explain why you don't have anything! Because to me what that looks like is trying to hide information and if the other side only had a five year old study to support its case you'd rip them a new one and you know it!
I want to like this show. I want to like it so bad. But the very thing they're using to tear apart the competition is the thing that makes their own argument hold no water whatsoever. Granted not that I needed P&T to teach me how to read someone's argument for flaws, but considering that that's the goal they're trying to get across I'm wondering why on earth more people aren't pointing out the extremely naked emperor? These guys have brains. Why aren't they using them?
Sigh. Penn & Teller need to stop being on my side. They're making my side look stupid.
In other news it's time yet again for me to realize that fundamental fact of life that more sleep = goodness, yay! So once more I'm cracking the whip on myself and trying to make sure I get to bed at a reasonable hour. This is going to result in some big ol' cutbacks in my IRC/online chatting time, because the biggest temptation for me to stay up late is thinking to myself "five more minutes" over and over as I finish a conversation, co-write a story, or what have you. I'm not saying I won't still do those things, just that I think I'm going to cut back on how many nights a week I do it and also that maybe co-writing is going to have to wait for nights when I can sleep in the next day. We'll see.
You know I'm 29 years old. Eventually I'll get the hang of the bottom rung of this hierarchy of needs. Next up: feeding myself! Did you know Creme Eggs aren't actually a food group? It's a fact! 8)
And now I'm off to work!
Anyhoo...
You know, I've been Tivoing Penn & Teller's new season of Bullshit and I watched last season too and man is this starting to turn into a masochistic thing for me. See, the thing is I'm on their side for the most part, but when proving their point they use the same bullshit tactics that the people they're trying to disprove use. How is that a winning strategy exactly?
See the thing that drives me nuts is that they'll point fingers at the opposition and call them on the carpet for using biased studies or unchecked facts, but then they turn around and do the exact same thing.
For example, in the last episode about legalizing drug use Penn & Teller cited statistics that had no reference to let us know who did that study, cited stats from people who are obviously biased (The guy from a pro-pot organization has studies that show pot isn't a gateway drug? Gee, who would've thunk it?), cited limited stats in rebuttal to something that sounded general (California statistics about traffic accidents when the man talking seemed to be talking about stats for America as a whole), and then topped it all off with non-sequiturs and strawmen (One guy says drug use isn't harmless because it hurts the family of the user. P&T counter with sappy music and yelling at the guy for wanting to deny a dying boy the right to use pot to ease his pain. Uh - not his argument guys. Not by a long shot.)
And the thing that especially gets me is that for the most part I'm on their side! I agree that pot isn't a gateway drug. But you don't use someone from a pro-pot organization to prove that! You show stats from a third party place which shows that the majority of pot users don't go on to other things. You mock the opposition savagely for the post hoc ergo propter hoc reasoning and then throw in that bit about tobacco and alcohol, which I'll at least grant was a good point of theirs.
And you don't tell someone who's arguing about the harm drug use does to families that they're mean mean mean and want to hurt little boys with cancer. You point out that drug addiction harms families just as any addiction harms families, and that if you're outlawing drugs for everyone because of what drug addiction does then you need to outlaw alcohol and gambling right along with it. Then you point out that you know morphine isn't exactly a drug that's without its addiction pitfalls, but if we're happy to give that to patients to help ease their pain then why not give pot to patients for the exact same purpose?
See? It doesn't have to be that hard.
And the stats - the stats! ARGH! They cited studies that ended in 1999! That's five years ago! Either show something current or explain why you don't have anything! Because to me what that looks like is trying to hide information and if the other side only had a five year old study to support its case you'd rip them a new one and you know it!
I want to like this show. I want to like it so bad. But the very thing they're using to tear apart the competition is the thing that makes their own argument hold no water whatsoever. Granted not that I needed P&T to teach me how to read someone's argument for flaws, but considering that that's the goal they're trying to get across I'm wondering why on earth more people aren't pointing out the extremely naked emperor? These guys have brains. Why aren't they using them?
Sigh. Penn & Teller need to stop being on my side. They're making my side look stupid.
In other news it's time yet again for me to realize that fundamental fact of life that more sleep = goodness, yay! So once more I'm cracking the whip on myself and trying to make sure I get to bed at a reasonable hour. This is going to result in some big ol' cutbacks in my IRC/online chatting time, because the biggest temptation for me to stay up late is thinking to myself "five more minutes" over and over as I finish a conversation, co-write a story, or what have you. I'm not saying I won't still do those things, just that I think I'm going to cut back on how many nights a week I do it and also that maybe co-writing is going to have to wait for nights when I can sleep in the next day. We'll see.
You know I'm 29 years old. Eventually I'll get the hang of the bottom rung of this hierarchy of needs. Next up: feeding myself! Did you know Creme Eggs aren't actually a food group? It's a fact! 8)
And now I'm off to work!
