So here’s the background. Daniel walks into the Cobra Kai dojo, looking to see if there’s anyone in learning some of the less brutal aspects of karate. Like, using it only for defense, awesome philosophical Miyagi one liners and friendly competition under a clearly defined set of rules. What he gets is a kick to the face and a challenge to a fight to the death, moderated by the top ninja assassin in the world. “Don’t worry, I’m totalllllly unbiased,” *wink wink*, “claims the ninja.
In all the information I’ve seen about this situation, the aspect of what actually qualifies as a debate is hotly contested, but these are underwhelming on three key missing components of actual debate.
Here’s a list of formal debating rules:
http://homepage.ntu.edu.tw/~karchung/debate1.htm
It requires your arguments be backed up by this pesky thing known as facts. Fail #1, Kennedy’s history is loaded with incorrect information. Changing his schtick for an actual debate has a probability of about zero. Second, the debate is to be designed to convince someone new to the information. An unbiased audience that can be swayed by the content of the arguments presented. Fail #2, the audience for Rogan’s show is not unbiased. They are highly skewed towards believing whatever Rogan says. Because Fail #3 -
There’s no moderator. Somebody to step in if things get off topic. Calling Rogan an unbiased moderator is likely calling a ninja assassin a bonsai enthusiast.
Rogan is very good at what he does. He’s quick, charismatic and entertaining. But unbiased, no way. He’s got that Tucker Carlson speak for ratings not facts quality.
An actual debate would have a predetermined pro and con topic to discuss. Maybe trim it down from the whole ball of wax (Vaccine Good vs. Vaccine Bad) to something more manageable. For example, face mask mandates during a pandemic. Then the sides have prep time to do research, flesh out their thoughts. Then entering the debate arena keep to just what the topic is about. Then when Daniel crane kicks the other guy in the face, because Daniel didn’t like that the guy called him a poopy head, the ninja says he’s disqualified instead of, “Wow! Didn’t expect that from you! Winner!!!”
He’s never going to see this, but if I had the chance I would tell Hotez to say something like this.
Fine, Joe. Use your clout to help us find a mutually agreeable unbiased moderator. You know, they don’t have to know anything about the medical side of vaccinations or stupid science stuff like that. They just need to understand tactics that are designed to win arguments instead of being right.
The conspiracy grifters love Joe Rogan. A lot of the content has been deleted by Zach himself or lost to the occasional Google deletion of his 20+ channels that got axed on YouTube. But at one point Hubbard had campaigned to get his followers to help him get a gig on Rogan’s podcast. Needless to say, numerology proving anything about a truly debatable topic is nonsense. He doesn’t want a platform for his ideas, Zach is ever and forever looking for a foothold in any large gathering of cognitively damaged easy to grift from marks.
I’m reminded of another pop culture reference, Monty Python’s argument sketch. A man up for a good argument has paid for it from an expert, masterfully played by John Cleese who simply contradicts him. That’s the quality of argument that would result if this Kennedy - Hotez debate came to be. Fortunately for now he’s been cautious enough about it.
This is a prime example of the anti-science movement where the grifters encourage attacking actual experts to try to level the playing field. And just like the pigeon chess players they are they’ve declared victory on a debate that hasn’t happened.
No comments:
Post a Comment