3.2 KiB
Think by Numbers » Reality-Based Statistics vs. Intuition-Based Conventional Wisdom
-
Author: u/DangerouslyUnstable *
-
Score: 6
-
Created: 2014-07-19T18:32:51
Post:
Comments:
u/DangerouslyUnstable [+2] (27 seconds later)
I thought this sub would appreciate this blog (which doesn't seem to be very well known).
u/Gurkenglas [+2] (2 hours later)
Policy debates should not appear one-sided, but I don't see any statistics in favor of any right-wing views, therefore that site seems biased.
u/None [+3] (11 hours later)
Have you considered that right-wing views might not be well-supported by facts? </trollface.jpg>
u/DangerouslyUnstable [+2] (21 hours later)
The sad thing is that the "right wing" party has moved so far from center that the views the party holds probably are less supported by facts. This probably isn't true for regular conservative people (of whom I know many and are all intelligent, relatively rational people).
Unfortunately that's just my gut feeling. It would be awesome if a blog like Think by Numbers could list the major planks of each party and analyze them all so we could get a more complete, balanced view.
u/None [+2] (22 hours later)
Yeah, I definitely know people with "right-leaning" or libertarian-leaning personalities who are entirely sane and capable of reason. The problem is that the available spectrum of opinions in most mainstream parties, across most of the Western world, has been skewed extremely far to the neoliberal right, and often the insane neoliberal right. So large parts of the populace have nobody to vote for, and the people who do have someone to vote for are fucking crazy.
u/DangerouslyUnstable [+2] (4 hours later)
You could probably make a pretty good case that it is biased in the choice of topics to cover but as far as I can tell, within those articles, it does a pretty good job of sticking to the facts and making rational analyses (although as a biologist I had some issues with his article on animal suffering).
Also, it seems to be tackling mostly the more obviously irrational policies. While I definitely agree that liberals have their fair share of wrong ideas and irrational thinking, I would argue that they tend to be harder to demonstrate exactly why (less obviously irrational).
It's really easy to show that our country is irrationally worried about terrorism over other threats, but it's a lot harder to show that it would be better for the economy if the corporate tax rate was cut to 0% (something a whole bunch of economists from across the political spectruam agree on)
Just out of curiosity, do you have any topics you think would balance out the coverage?
u/Gurkenglas [+1] (7 hours later)
Nah sorry, I just saw the imbalance and got suspicious.
u/PeridexisErrant [+2] put aside fear for courage, and death for life (3 days later)
Please keep posts on topic - this is neither rational fiction nor directly related to it.