I received this very thoughtful criticism on a Class video at YouTube, which I take to be most kind, and found it important enough to answer here.
I love these videos, but may I ask you something totally respectfully that sounds kind of rude?
Do you think the people who would benefit from hearing this actually care? Do you just make these videos for fun? As I get older I realize debating/bringing logic and proof is totally useless for 98% of the population. Just study advertising. It makes companies billions and billions of dollars, none of it involves facts or high level analysis.
Anyway, I really like the videos, just curious to know your opinion on debate and trying to change others viewpoints in general
In order:
Yes, you, and any, may ask, even rudely. My skin is thick.
Not really, no, I don’t think most care, and nor will they. I’d sure like them to, but I’ve been at this for a while now with no real success in the powers that be, so it’s rational to suppose there will never be any. On the other hand, miracles do happen.
And yes, in a sort of way, the videos are fun to make, but I think it’s better to say I have to make them, just as I have to write about these things. Once I have an idea along these lines, I have to get it out or it builds up pressure.
The ordinary academic path was taken from me, and anyway that route is now so far gone that this complaint has no weight. I do reach the odd colleague here from time to time, though if they’re in the system, they can’t acknowledge the connection without personal difficulty to themselves. So this is it. This or nothing, and trust in the Lord.
I, of course, have no official sort of funding, or compensation, or remuneration of any kind from any mainline source, nor even from any kind of energy—or any!—company, or think tank or any other entity in their employ. What I do have is the incredible generosity of readers and viewers like yourself, folks who, it seems unbelievable to say, part with a few bucks every month to keep me going, and to ensure all my work remains free and “open source” for everybody. That is in the true, old and now expired, spirit of the university.
Your estimate of 98% more or less matches my own. Although perhaps you’re more an optimist than I. Let me quote from my award-eligible soon-to-be some-seller second edition of Everything You Believe Is Wrong, written in complaint of the ineradicable fallacies in common use which rule, not only advertising, as you say, but the bulk of our political discourse:
Worse, there does not appear to be a reliable solution for this innate intellectual incorrigibleness. Every possible corrective action has been tried, from gentle admonishment to outright punishment. Nothing sticks, not for long. Fallacies thrust deep roots into our discourse, and it is only by the long passage of time, sometimes lifetimes, that once-popular fallacies are removed from the public sphere—usually to be replaced by new ones.
We can rail about this, and try correctives like replacing bad arguments with good ones, as we try in this book, but our effort will be mostly in vain. Cardinal and convert John Henry Newman, now a Saint, knew about the futility of logical demonstration: “Persons influence us, voices melt us, looks subdue us, deeds inflame us. Many a man will live and die upon a dogma: no man will be a martyr for a conclusion.” So it will be here.
So it will be here, too.
And yet so it ever is. This is the human condition, credulity is part of our nature, and there is no removing it. We can only abate it from time to time, and count on that two percent (or a lot less) to carry us forward.
My hope is that even if most don’t follow my arcane and, yes, obtuse and confusing philosophical arguments, they’ll at least learn how goofy most of what passes for Science through the many, many examples I highlight. I don’t cheat with these, either, bringing you only the best and most prominent examples, the very ones Experts, rulers and academics tout as worthy. If I can help people build an initial skepticism to new claims, then I think I will have accomplished something.
For now, all I can do is thank you most sincerely for watching or reading. And if you really want to help me out, the best way is to pass on these videos and articles to others. You have my deepest and sincerest thanks.
Video
All my work is free and user-supported. Here’s how to help:
- Subscribe at Substack (paid or free!)
- Cash App: $WilliamMBriggs
- Zelle: use email: matt@wmbriggs.com
- Buy me a coffee
- Paypal
- Other credit card subscription or single donations
- Hire me
- Subscribe at YouTube
- PASS POSTS ON TO OTHERS
Discover more from William M. Briggs
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Matt, you’re an inspiration to many of us who don’t possess your analytical skills. You’re capable of cutting through the fog and exposing the nonsense behind bad ideas in a way that seems obvious after we see it, but isn’t so obvious to many of us before you expose it. And your ideas stick in ways that you can’t predict.
I sent you an email on 8/26, re: Briggs’ “Third Way” Now Implemented in Software.” I know you’re inundated with emails, but I wonder if you saw it. Though I am not a mathematician, with the help of Claude I was able to reduce you publication from about 10 years ago to code. It’s a big project, but I’m continuing to work on updating my software for general use with the incorporation of predictive probability. Keep up the videos.
I asked myself the same question as your viewer, Bill, when trying to engage online readers about the logical (and scientific) fallacies associated with the Late Great Fauxvid Imposture. I got so fed up with having to hack my way through hopelessly entangled thinking that I started collecting a list of anecdotal reasons why attempting to engage in rational argument (with the online commentariat, at least) is largely a waste of time. I then tried to abstract these anecdotes into general principles, resulting in a draft essay I brazenly entitled, “On the Futility of Rational Argument: Why Engaging in Online Discourse Is Largely a Waste of Time.”
My point wasn’t that rational argument was useless in se, but only that its utility in arriving at truth and agreement was largely dependent on factors completely extrinsic to the process of rational thought itself. I should dust that essay off and finish it, even though in retrospect its conclusions could have been arrived at ab initio.
If nothing else, my experiences provided me with personal empirical evidence that, to adapt Tacitus, stupidity once exposed has no refuge but in audacity.
Keep up the great work, Bill. You’re over the target.
Why does anyone put a message in a bottle, and toss it into the sea?
Well I for one appreciate your work. Thank you for all the time you put into this.
Megafires can, and sometimes do, start with a single spark. Don’t underestimate the power of Truth. Therefore, (continue to) wield your sword with compassion.
All,
Thanks for the kind words and inspiration, everybody. It means a lot to me.
it is not about the carelessness of others or their responsiveness. It is about the fact that if you are in a state of grace and you do a good deed, it is a meritorious act that raises your place in Heaven.
Praying some time ago I asked myself the same question the user has. And in prayer it came to me that the fight against the evils of our age is meant to be an instrument for our santification. So it only matters that you strive daily to perform a morally good act with all your heart and ask Our Lord in prayer what he wants you to do. He will do the rest.
As Fr. Chris Alar said: “Jesus already won the war, we are just working on the details”.
Truth, Goodness, Beauty. Thank you for dispensing truth, much needed. You, also, like Isaiah, talk mostly to the remnant, and thank you again for strengthening us and showing that we are not alone!
Pretty much anything I write is for myself. I lack the discipline to keep a journal. One of my favourite things is a screenplay I wrote and put online that practically nobody except me has read. The way the characters came to life in my head and responded as I wrote it almost as if they were actual people I was observing was fascinating. If I wasn’t so lazy I’d be a novelist but I don’t have the attention span anymore, if I ever did. I admire Brigg’s work ethic and that’s what I find baffling about his output. Briggs is plowing the sea and having a ball at it.
In reviewing some of the stuff I’ve pulled off old computer disks and digital archives (I’ve been at this since before the intarw3bz was a thing) I can see that my intellectual capacity has declined with age but many of my underlying assumptions and beliefs have held firm. This too shall pass.