|
|
|
|
|
|
by mindslight
22 days ago
|
|
|
> The hard way was tariffs, you know that. No, this was shortly after the US military had attacked Venezuela. It's reasonable to take this as a threat to use the military. > Funny that these professional journalists didn’t think to ask to clarify such a monumental possibility They did. They got "no comment". We covered this. You also completely skipped over "I no longer feel an obligation to think purely of Peace", as well as the copious other statements from Trump and his deputies implying the same thing. Those are all a mere web search away. This is feeling like a gish gallop of highly motivated reasoning, and I am having a hard time believing your claim that you're an unbiased "grey" looking for truth rather than merely a Trump supporter in denial. If you want to pull up from this, you're going to have to start addressing the core of my point. |
|
|
- "He hinted at use of force" (he did!)
- "I think he's implying the use of force" (you own your thoughts!)
Problematic statements:
- "He IS implying use of force!" is actually just a guess, even if (let's say) it's 80% likely to be true. It's still a guess. It's not something you know.
- "HE THREATENED TO USE FORCE!" you've just promoted your guess into yelling fire in a crowded theater because you're a troll
None of this reasoning applies if you're a cat. For a cat, words and sentences just register as an emotional valence, with no comprehension of what it means to distinguish fact from inference.
If you are a cat, I apologize for misapprehending your lived experience.