The most uninteresting internet talking points

[Skm1091]

I've mentioned this on Facebook, but the "Back in my day" bullshit needs to die the death.

back in the day?

[dallen68]

back in the day?

Well, sort of. The argument goes something like:

"Back in my day, (or alternately, "When I was (a kid, in school, etc.) we showed respect, worked hard, didn't have stuff handed to us, etc. etc."

No we didn't.
No, we didn't.
Yes, we did.

I've been hearing this form of argument for at least 40 years, and it never changes. I read a book from the 1830's - same argument. There's no reason to think any generation is any better or worse than another.

[Travis Retriever]

I've mentioned this on Facebook, but the "Back in my day" bullshit needs to die the death.

Reminds me of a Weird Al song that actually poked fun at the "Back in MY day" mentality: 

[yt]9kB78hM_lkI[/yt]

[MrBogosity]

I once saw a Japanese comedienne on Comedy Central, talking about this: "You think YOU have it rough? You know what we get in Japan? 'When I was your age, we had two nuclear bombs dropped on us!' How do you top that?"

[evensgrey]

I once saw a Japanese comedienne on Comedy Central, talking about this: "You think YOU have it rough? You know what we get in Japan? 'When I was your age, we had two nuclear bombs dropped on us!' How do you top that?"

My understanding is that it wouldn't come up.  In Japan, there's a strong social stigma attached to being a survivor or a descendant of a survivor of those attacks.  People think you may have damaged genes from radiation exposure and don't want to be involved with you.  As a result, the survivors and their families keep it as quiet as possible.

[MrBogosity]

My understanding is that it wouldn't come up.  In Japan, there's a strong social stigma attached to being a survivor or a descendant of a survivor of those attacks.  People think you may have damaged genes from radiation exposure and don't want to be involved with you.  As a result, the survivors and their families keep it as quiet as possible.

She was joking, of course. It was a stand-up routine.

[MrBogosity]

"I don't have time to waste watching your video/checking your sources/providing sources that back me up/explain the data and arguments that led me to my conclusion."

Oh, but you have time to spend hours making ridiculous comments denigrating those who know more than you do...

[R.E.H.W.R.]

"I don't have time to waste watching your video/checking your sources/providing sources that back me up/explain the data and arguments that led me to my conclusion."

Oh, but you have time to spend hours making ridiculous comments denigrating those who know more than you do...

And every one of those comments says the same thing over and over and over.

[Travis Retriever]

I think what they're trying to say is "you don't get to use something that happened to you when you were a kid as a free pass for wrong doing today."

Which still fails because 1) if they believed that they shouldn't have offered to take responsibility in the first place, 2) it's just an ex-post facto excuse. and 3) by 1 and 2 it's an avoidance of the point.

[dallen68]

Which still fails because 1) if they believed that they shouldn't have offered to take responsibility in the first place, 2) it's just an ex-post facto excuse. and 3) by 1 and 2 it's an avoidance of the point.

Well, yes. I didn't say I agreed with the argument, I was just explaining what the argument is. Without knowing the details, I can't really say whether or not something in your past excuses the current thing. Sometimes it does; sometimes it doesn't depending on what it is.

[MrBogosity]

Related to Appeal to Open-Mindedness:

"You're acting like you're right and everyone who says differently is wrong!"

Uh...yeah, when you make a factual statement supported by the evidence, how are you SUPPOSED to act?

"Evolution is real and creationism is crap." "You're acting like you're right and everyone who says differently is wrong!"

"Vaccinations WORK, and anti-vaccination activists KILL BABIES when they convince people not to vaccinate." "You're acting like you're right and everyone who says differently is wrong!"

"I say 2+2=4!" "You're acting like you're right and everyone who says differently is wrong!"

"You're acting like you're right and everyone who says differently is wrong!" Why, yes, yes I am. And can you think of the reason why?

Here's a hint: if I'm NOT right, you can provide this stuff called EVIDENCE and convince me.

[MrBogosity]

Related to the above:

"You think everything you believe is right, don't you?"

Well, YEAH, to be honest! What's the alternative? I believe something I think is wrong? Why would I do that?

[MrBogosity]

"Truth is somewhere in the middle!"

Oh, really? So between round-Earth and flat-Earth it's somewhere in the middle? Between the moon being made of rock or of cheese it's somewhere in the middle (a rocky sort of cheese)?

I guess since science says the Earth is 4.55 billion years old and creationism says it's 6000 years old its real age is therefore 2.27 billion years?

I think this is related to the Fallacy of Grey: http://lesswrong.com/lw/mm/the_fallacy_of_gray/

So, if the truth is an inch away from me, while the other side is kilometers away, does that count as "in the middle?" I guess an oblate spheroid would then therefore be "in the middle" (slightly!) between a flat and spherical Earth. But somehow, that doesn't seem to be what they're saying. This is used to try to make both sides seem to have the same degree of legitimacy, when they simply don't.

[Travis Retriever]

"Truth is somewhere in the middle!"

Oh, really? So between round-Earth and flat-Earth it's somewhere in the middle? Between the moon being made of rock or of cheese it's somewhere in the middle (a rocky sort of cheese)?

I guess since science says the Earth is 4.55 billion years old and creationism says it's 6000 years old its real age is therefore 2.27 billion years?

I think this is related to the Fallacy of Grey: http://lesswrong.com/lw/mm/the_fallacy_of_gray/

So, if the truth is an inch away from me, while the other side is kilometers away, does that count as "in the middle?" I guess an oblate spheroid would then therefore be "in the middle" (slightly!) between a flat and spherical Earth. But somehow, that doesn't seem to be what they're saying. This is used to try to make both sides seem to have the same degree of legitimacy, when they simply don't.

That has a name.  It's called the Golden Mean Fallacy.  Or as TheAmazingAtheist likes to call it, 'The Agnostic Fallacy' for reasons that are obvious if you've ever talked to a self proclaimed agnostic before.

[MrBogosity]

That has a name.  It's called the Golden Mean Fallacy.  Or as TheAmazingAtheist likes to call it, 'The Agnostic Fallacy' for reasons that are obvious if you've ever talked to a self proclaimed agnostic before.

And here I thought the Golden Mean Fallacy was actually about the Golden Mean (i.e., ≈1.618), that's been applied to all sorts of things it has nothing to do with (like most of numerology does).