• TrickDacy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    39
    ·
    7 months ago

    I like how you imply qa anon leaps and obvious deductive powers are the same.

    • Deceptichum@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      45
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Obvious deductive powers like not reading the article? Or do you think his mum was in on it too?

      This article headline is written to push people to a conclusion. If it had simply added the word “illness” most people would not be “deducting” shit. It’s media manipulation to generate clicks and you’re falling for it.

    • Aatube@kbin.melroy.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      Deducing from headlines and circumstances while ignoring crucial information is exactly what QAnon does

      • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Thinking it’s possible a seedy thing happened =/= making up reams of bullshit based on a number in the background but sure everyone who disagrees with you is qanon

        • Aatube@kbin.melroy.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          I intended to make it more like a cautionary tale. QAnon can happen to the best of us, and seedy thoughts that still consider that it was an illness for a while are sort of an entry point to the thought pattern behind conspiracy theories. If one builds tolerance to this kind of leap, it’ll be easier to build tolerance for much bigger leaps.

          • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            QAnon can happen to the best of us,

            I don’t agree. It happens to vulnerable people. And it’s not like a disease you can catch if you’re not vigilant. There are many steps to becoming bat shit, and wondering if a specific corporation would kill a person isn’t something I’m willing to avoid because next thing I know I’d be trying to hang the vice president.

            • Aatube@kbin.melroy.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              7 months ago

              Everyone is vulnerable in one way or another. Of course, wondering is natural, but seriously accepting it, as some in this thread have done, is a QAnon kind of leap.

            • EatATaco@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              wondering if a specific corporation would kill a person

              You have to realize how your first post came off. The poster you responded to clearly was talking about the people claiming Boeing did it. Of which there are plenty of this thread.

              You then jumped in and said this wasn’t conspiracy nonsense, but the result of “obvious deductive powers.”

              This did not come off as merely “wondering” or considering it a possibility, but as if you were saying it was an obvious fact.

              I’m not even sure how to interpret that comment in relation to what you’re saying now.

              • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                7 months ago

                What I remember seeing was people making implications and jokes. People don’t always mean things 100% literally. I doubt there are all that many people totally convinced it was Boeing, but some of you are acting like that is the case. I disagree, that is all

                Ps deductive reasoning doesn’t mean “I know it for a fact”

                • EatATaco@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  If my kid goes into the kitchen, and I go in a little while later and see the cookies are gone, i’m going to believe they ate them. Am I 100% convinced of it? No. Maybe i just didn’t realize they had been eaten earlier, or maybe someone snuck in the back and ate them. But I’m relatively convinced they ate the.

                  I’m sure there are very few people, at most, that are convince 100% that Boeing did it. But it’s very presumptuous to assume that all of the people in this thread claiming Boeing did it are just joking. Seems more reasonable to take their statements at face value and understand that they do think Boeing did it, or at least someone related to boeing did it.

                  But I’m not sure what this has to do with what was suggested by your initial post.

                  Ps deductive reasoning doesn’t mean “I know it for a fact”

                  By definition deductive reason is using logic to come to a specific conclusion, so it absolutely does mean it’s a fact.

                  • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    7 months ago

                    Deductive reasoning means using evidence so no you’re flat wrong. Also, ever heard of a “knee jerk reaction”? Hint, that also isn’t a term that means you’re sure of anything