tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post116006244347509678..comments2024-03-27T11:16:36.951-07:00Comments on One Cʘsmos: Innocence Lost and FoundGagdad Bobhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14249005793605006679noreply@blogger.comBlogger63125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-46570031170747572062007-09-01T11:17:00.000-07:002007-09-01T11:17:00.000-07:00Regarding the "sophisticated left", you should be ...Regarding the "sophisticated left", you should be aware of this article:<BR/><BR/><A HREF="http://gagne.homedns.org/~tgagne/contrib/unskilled.html" REL="nofollow">Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties in Recognizing One's Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments</A><BR/><BR/>by Justin Kruger and David Dunning<BR/>Department of Psychology<BR/>Cornell University<BR/><BR/><B>Abstract</B><BR/>People tend to hold overly favorable views of their abilities in many social and intellectual domains. The authors suggest that this overestimation occurs, in part, because people who are unskilled in these domains suffer a dual burden: Not only do these people reach erroneous conclusions and make unfortunate choices, but their incompetence robs them of the metacognitive ability to realize it. Across 4 studies, the authors found that participants scoring in the bottom quartile on tests of humor, grammar, and logic grossly overestimated their test performance and ability. Although their test scores put them in the 12th percentile, they estimated themselves to be in the 62nd. Several analyses linked this miscalibration to deficits in metacognitive skill, or the capacity to distinguish accuracy from error. Paradoxically, improving the skills of participants, and thus increasing their metacognitive competence, helped them recognize the limitations of their abilities.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1160446557960480032006-10-09T19:15:00.000-07:002006-10-09T19:15:00.000-07:00I've been following the back and forth with surafe...I've been following the back and forth with surafel. I would define "openly gay" as someone who identifies themselves publicly as such. How do those on the left identify/recognize gays, especially those bent on outing closeted gays, which many seem intent on doing? Surafel seems intent on arguing a point which is irrelevent as Bob says, and avoiding the larger point.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1160444566271838702006-10-09T18:42:00.000-07:002006-10-09T18:42:00.000-07:00I checked the Aiken blog as well-- Arrgh! The mali...I checked the Aiken blog as well-- Arrgh! The malice is so thick you could cut it with a knife. One reason I've cut back on reading blogs is that I'm sick of running across stuff like that. I don't remember ever having run across that sort of mindset until I went online, except for a few run-ins with people who might have qualified for Dr. Peck's term "People of the Lie". Is it getting more prevalent, or is it just that such people are now able to link up more easily?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1160286466019638772006-10-07T22:47:00.000-07:002006-10-07T22:47:00.000-07:00P.S. I couldn't edit other people's comments even ...P.S. I couldn't edit other people's comments even if I wanted to. Nice try though.Surafel Tsegahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17792672442572517885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1160286084829790232006-10-07T22:41:00.000-07:002006-10-07T22:41:00.000-07:00You caught me!1. I still don’t understand why you ...You caught me!<BR/><BR/>1. I still don’t understand why you simply won’t answer this question. A big part of me thinks this is some sort of game you’re playing, and to that I say touché. <BR/>2. I still don’t think my question is irrelevant because the issue at hand was never what we thought the federal government can and cannot do. The issue was why you believe what you believe, that openly gay people should not be boy scout leaders or teachers. A few posts back, you questioned why Democrats are opposing the Mark Foley scandal. You agreed with Democrats that Mark Foley is a pervert, but you were curious as to why they opposed it. And now I am doing the same thing. ….But of course, before I could even get to that, it’s important to understand that we are on the same page with respect to the definition of what being openly gay means, as I have said ad nauseum. If we have different definitions of what being openly gay means, then we obviously can’t have a discussion as to whether or not there should be openly gay scout leaders or teachers. Look back at our previous posts, and notice that I first asked you what you meant by “openly gay.” My intentions were never to get into the validity of the Supreme Court ruling. Again, I ask that you not put words into my mouth or make baseless assumptions. I have been rather straightforward in my purpose.<BR/>3. If you look back at our conversation, I mentioned explicitly that I agreed that the government should not force the Boy Scouts to accept openly gay leaders. I’m sure the “loons” caught that as well. <BR/>4. You should also take the time to read all the comments posted (or even use the always convenient “Find” option on your browser). Not a single person called anyone a homophobe. People certainly called you or others “anti-gay.” If the BSA is morally opposed to homosexuals, I think that makes them anti-gay (on some level, to say the least). And, as you have yet to disprove my earlier arguments, your opinions also put you in the anti-gay camp. How far this label extends is certainly debatable. <BR/><BR/>Please quit with the personal attacks and answer a straightforward question. <BR/><BR/>I look forward to hearing your response.Surafel Tsegahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17792672442572517885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1160283028708139512006-10-07T21:50:00.000-07:002006-10-07T21:50:00.000-07:00By the way, Politico, you may want to mention to y...By the way, Politico, you may want to mention to your fellow loons at dailykos that you agree with "the opposition" that the federal government should not force the Boy Scouts to accept openly gay leaders, that these kinds of choices should be left to individuals, and that believing these things in no way makes one a "homophobe." Class act that you are, I'm sure you'll immediately correct the slanderous comments your mouth-breathing cohorts have made about me.Gagdad Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14249005793605006679noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1160280544662876862006-10-07T21:09:00.000-07:002006-10-07T21:09:00.000-07:00Your question is irrelevant if you agree with me o...Your question is irrelevant if you agree with me on the larger principle. For example, conservatives are obviously discriminated against in universities and newsrooms, where they are outnumbered 10 or 20 or sometimes 25 to one. <BR/><BR/>But once you agree with me that the federal government has no business forcing universities to hire more conservative professors, what difference does it make how one defines the term "openly conservative?" It's entirely moot once you agree with me that it is not the job of the federal government to force people to hire gays or conservatives or anyone else.Gagdad Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14249005793605006679noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1160276752295277312006-10-07T20:05:00.000-07:002006-10-07T20:05:00.000-07:00I'm not even trying to explain where we differ. I'...I'm not even trying to explain where we differ. I'm asking you what I think is a simple question. You made a statement regarding an issue, and I asked you to elaborate. Most of my posts have been asking you to elaborate on your position. Is there something wrong with simple curiosity?<BR/><BR/>Why won't you answer that question?! I mean seriously, this is getting ridiculous. I've asked this question 3 or 4 times. I'm an idiot... beat me over the head with a stick. Give me an explicit definition. For the love of God, do it!Surafel Tsegahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17792672442572517885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1160276262138027592006-10-07T19:57:00.000-07:002006-10-07T19:57:00.000-07:00Surafel--Since you agree with me that people shoul...Surafel--<BR/><BR/>Since you agree with me that people should be free to choose or not choose gay or straight teachers or scout leaders for their children as they see fit--even if we personally disagree with the choices people will make--why don't you explain where we differ?Gagdad Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14249005793605006679noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1160268518305300152006-10-07T17:48:00.000-07:002006-10-07T17:48:00.000-07:00P.S. All I was asking for was an explicit definiti...P.S. All I was asking for was an explicit definition of what you thought being openly gay meant. I didn't actually think that question was confusing or not relevant to the discussion at hand. I was simply trying to better understand your position. I'll put my life on hold until I get the response you asked.Surafel Tsegahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17792672442572517885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1160267018517397232006-10-07T17:23:00.000-07:002006-10-07T17:23:00.000-07:00...And I guess you'll avoid my question....And I guess you'll avoid my question.Surafel Tsegahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17792672442572517885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1160259702906012322006-10-07T15:21:00.000-07:002006-10-07T15:21:00.000-07:00Surafel--We'll just have to stipulate that one of ...Surafel--<BR/><BR/>We'll just have to stipulate that one of us is delusional, and let the readers decide who it is.Gagdad Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14249005793605006679noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1160258288635286552006-10-07T14:58:00.000-07:002006-10-07T14:58:00.000-07:00Brilliant Bob. A friend shared your essay with me....Brilliant Bob. A friend shared your essay with me. I even posted it at my site, of which you are welcome to at any time.<BR/><BR/>Be Still and Know Discussion Board http://www.activeboard.com/forum.spark?forumID=12195&p=1<BR/><BR/>- Al FulchinoAl Fulchinohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14406617014221536081noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1160257898658505122006-10-07T14:51:00.000-07:002006-10-07T14:51:00.000-07:00"I never said that I think the government should f..."I never said that I think the government should force the Boy Scouts to allow openly gay leaders. It is a private organization and has the right to reject whoever it wants."<BR/><BR/>"People should be free to choose or not choose gay or straight teachers or scout leaders for their children as they see fit."<BR/><BR/>For the most part, we actually agree on something! <BR/><BR/>Although now, I think I understand your logic. You simply do not want a gay scout leader or teacher. Period. Not just an openly gay scout leader or teacher, but any kind of gay scout leader or teacher. <BR/><BR/>You avoided the question that I asked: "You said that teachers can be gay in their private life. But if they were asked about their sexuality, and they said they were homosexuals, would that mean that they are openly gay, even if their actions do not change? With respect to this Supreme Court decision, the student was "outed" in a newspaper photograph. If that photo was not printed, could that student still lead a group?" <BR/><BR/>You must believe that even if the students don't know that their leader/teacher is a homosexual, the administration knowing is tantamount to foisting their sexuality on innocent children. Even if the topic of sexuality doesn't come up in front of the children, or leaders/teachers are instructed not to discuss issues regarding sexuality, the fact that the administration knows the person is gay is, again, tantamount to foisting their sexuality on innocent children. You don't want your children around that person simply because he is gay. Don't try to hide behind the argument that "if they are openly gay, they shouldn't teach." You think that being gay means throwing your sexuality in people’s faces, that a gay person doesn’t know how to act in front of children or how to have proper etiquette or respect for other opinions in the workplace. You think that being openly gay simply means teaching kids that homosexuality is okay, or kissing one’s partner in the classroom or on school grounds or at a school function. You may have taken the issue a bit too far, and ignored the fact that for many, simply being openly gay in the workplace means not denying that you are a homosexual. Even if that person gave no hint of being gay (whatever you may think that hint is), to you, the administration knowing means they are openly gay. [And seeing as how you just said, “People should be free to choose or not choose gay or sraight teachers or scout leaders for their children as they see fit,” I think I’m right] This is the only way that I can justify your argument to this point.<BR/><BR/>And lets get one thing straight: I have never advocated forcing you or the Boy Scouts to accept openly gay leaders (however you wish to define that), nor have I advocated encroaching upon your liberties (as you continue to claim for some odd reason).<BR/><BR/>You tried to justify your argument, and I have suggested repeatedly that your justification is simply a non sequitur, and more importantly, along the lines of delusional thinking. <BR/><BR/>If my assessment is incorrect, please let me know, and I’ll be happy to say that I would’ve been somewhat satisfied with the discussion.Surafel Tsegahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17792672442572517885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1160253822995372922006-10-07T13:43:00.000-07:002006-10-07T13:43:00.000-07:00I do not understand what part of my response you d...I do not understand what part of my response you don't understand. People should be free to choose or not choose gay or sraight teachers or scout leaders for their children as they see fit. Period. To me, liberty is a much more important value than equality, let alone the agenda of civil rights extremists. I believe that all anti-discrimination laws should be abolished, with the possible exception of race (but even those probably do more harm than good, both to society and to the intended beneficiaries).Gagdad Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14249005793605006679noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1160250780615681052006-10-07T12:53:00.000-07:002006-10-07T12:53:00.000-07:00You have again avoided my point about what being o...You have again avoided my point about what being openly gay means and what that has to do with being a Boy Scout leader. <BR/><BR/>I never said that I think the government should force the Boy Scouts to allow openly gay leaders. It is a private organization and has the right to reject whoever it wants. Please do not put words in my mouth or assume that you know the opinions that I have.<BR/><BR/>If you are arguing with respect to morality, then that is a valid argument, as I have previously mentioned.<BR/><BR/>I expected more of a discussion from you, especially given your intelligent posts. Labeling me a "leftist who supports heavy-handed state intervention," insinuating that I oppose liberty, and implying (if not outright saying) that I am un-American goes nowhere. <BR/><BR/>You said that teachers can be gay in their private life. But if they were asked about their sexuality, and they said they were homosexuals, would mean that they are openly gay, even if their actions do not change? With respect to this Supreme Court decision, the student was "outed" in a newspaper photograph. If that photo was not printed, could that student still lead a group?<BR/><BR/>You have danced around the issue at hand. You have failed to offer a definition of what you think being openly gay means. You have assumed what the opposition believes, but have no proof to back it up. Your silence will speak volumes.Surafel Tsegahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17792672442572517885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1160246951572581292006-10-07T11:49:00.000-07:002006-10-07T11:49:00.000-07:00Surafel--You just disagree with American principle...Surafel--<BR/><BR/>You just disagree with American principles, which is fine. In my opinion, the federal government has no business legally forcing a group that is rooted in traditional morality to accept openly gay leaders, any more than the federal government has the constitutional right to force you to engage in racial disrimination under the name of "affirmative action." You are on one side of that cultural battle, I am on the other. I am a liberal in favor of liberty, you are aparently a leftist in favor of heavy-handed state intervention to enforce leftist ideals.Gagdad Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14249005793605006679noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1160244788966482512006-10-07T11:13:00.000-07:002006-10-07T11:13:00.000-07:00Thanks for responding again Gagdad Bob. The purpos...Thanks for responding again Gagdad Bob. <BR/><BR/>The purpose of my question was to first understand what you considered being "openly gay" meant. Because if we have different definitions of what it means, then obviously we can't have a legitimate discussion on this issue. <BR/><BR/>Taking this a step further, does everyone simply have a different definition of what being "openly gay" means? Were those fighting the case in the Supreme Court suggesting that kids should be explicitly taught about homosexuality? Were they fighting to kiss their partners in front of the kids? Besides, when does the topic of sexuality come up in Boy Scout meetings anyways? <BR/><BR/>...As I've been writing this post, I have been doing some research on the topic. It seems as if the Boy Scouts already have a designated plan to handle questions regarding sexuality (do nothing-- pass the children onto family, schools, churches, or professionals to deal with the situation). <BR/><BR/>So now, I don’t get what all the fuss is about. I don’t think the Boy Scouts should be handling topics of sexuality in a group of young boys (some may not be ready for it, etc etc). But I don’t exactly see what’s wrong if a Boy Scout leader happens to be gay, esp. if there is a system in place to handle topics regarding sexuality. Those gay leaders who oppose that system can leave the organization. <BR/><BR/>If you, gagdad bob, oppose these gay leaders for moral reasons, that is a legitimate argument (esp. given the fact that the organization deals with morality on some level, however simple that may be). I just don’t understand the argument that you’re scared these young boys will be taught about homosexuality. <BR/><BR/>...I'd like to hear your thoughts on what I said. Thanks again.Surafel Tsegahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17792672442572517885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1160232893449286332006-10-07T07:54:00.000-07:002006-10-07T07:54:00.000-07:00Dear Bob, Thank you so much for your excellent pos...Dear Bob, Thank you so much for your excellent post. Your blog has become must reading for me and I have introduced many friends to your site. This essay was profound on so many levels and addressed an issue I have been thinking about for some time. Watching the news footage of the students running out of Columbine High School, what struck me the most was how the girls were dressed (or not). The other day I pointed out to my husband how a 10-year-old girl was hobbling into church in heels. He thought it "cute" until I reminded him that at that age I would have been wearing anklets and mary-janes--and I grew up in the 60s! Thanks for putting it all in context and for your insights. I will continue to look forward to your posts.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1160204181207270702006-10-06T23:56:00.000-07:002006-10-06T23:56:00.000-07:00Surafel--I might be able to respond to your point ...Surafel--<BR/><BR/>I might be able to respond to your point if I knew what it was. If you think it is a good idea for grade school children to be taught about homosexuality, or to be taught by male teachers who kiss their boyfriends in front of them, we just disagree. This is why I am for vouchers. If that is what you want for your child, you should be free to choose it.Gagdad Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14249005793605006679noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1160186981545246752006-10-06T19:09:00.000-07:002006-10-06T19:09:00.000-07:00I'm surprised by your response, gagdad bob. I thou...I'm surprised by your response, gagdad bob. I thought the number of 1% seemed a bit too low, and I agree that 10% may be too high. I was simply looking at what I had found via googling, and suggesting your number might not be the definitive number. (And I was not suggesting that 5-10% of the entire population was homosexual... in case that's what you think I was suggesting).<BR/><BR/>And I'm a little taken aback by you labeling me an "activist loon." I hope you aren't dodging the question I posed to you about what an "openly gay man" means. I expected a little more out of you. Maybe I phrased my question poorly, and if you think I did, I apologize. I was just trying to understand your logic. <BR/><BR/>I still hope to hear a response about the initial question (Even Bill Clinton responded to Chris Wallace).<BR/><BR/>P.S. Don't be quick to assume that I disagree with you on this issue.Surafel Tsegahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17792672442572517885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1160181864615358542006-10-06T17:44:00.000-07:002006-10-06T17:44:00.000-07:00Surafel--If you actually think that 5-10% of the p...Surafel--<BR/><BR/>If you actually think that 5-10% of the population is homosexual, you are just an activist loon, so no further purpose can be served by responding to you. Believe whatever fantasies you wish.Gagdad Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14249005793605006679noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1160180195366781682006-10-06T17:16:00.000-07:002006-10-06T17:16:00.000-07:00Hi gagdad bob.Thanks for responding again. What ex...Hi gagdad bob.<BR/><BR/>Thanks for responding again. What exactly do you mean by openly gay? Someone who is flamboyant? Someone who does not deny their sexuality when asked? Someone who openly kisses men in public?<BR/><BR/>Oh and I found the <A HREF="http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/reprint/94/1/41/" REL="nofollow">link</A>. I was mistaken. It was 98% of molested boys and 99.6% of molested girls (this is what I get for not completely checking all the facts). And some numbers I have found about % of the male population that is homosexual is between 5-10% (although much of what I found suggested it is closer to 5%).Surafel Tsegahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17792672442572517885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1160175265400577262006-10-06T15:54:00.000-07:002006-10-06T15:54:00.000-07:00Surafel--Yes, of course. I linked to the stats the...Surafel--<BR/><BR/>Yes, of course. I linked to the stats the other day. This means that the remaining 10% of abusers come from less than 1% of the population, meaning that child abusers are vastly over-represented among gay men. This is well understood.<BR/><BR/>No, I do not believe there should be openly gay teachers. If they wish to be gay in their private life, that's their choice, but it is wrong to foist their homosexuality upon innocent children. <BR/><BR/>Remember, the issue for the Boy Scouts is openly gay leaders. There have always been gay Scout leaders, but now leftists are tryimg to force the Scouts to have openly gay leaders, a very bad idea.Gagdad Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14249005793605006679noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8580258.post-1160173632002151362006-10-06T15:27:00.000-07:002006-10-06T15:27:00.000-07:00... and about the opposition to gay Boy Scout lead...... and about the opposition to gay Boy Scout leaders, is this rooted in the idea that all gay men are attracted to young boys or the idea that there may be a few gay men who are and can't control such urges?<BR/><BR/>Should there also not be gay teachers (there are many opportunities for one-on-one interaction)?<BR/><BR/>And finally, gagdad bob, I just wanted to know whether or not you have ever come across the statistic that over 90% of child molestors (in this case, those who target boys) are heterosexual, and what your thoughts were on that (if I can find the link, I will post it).Surafel Tsegahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17792672442572517885noreply@blogger.com