Conventional wisdom or what some refer to as truths of the world are usually nothing more than completely unproven false assumptions. Take this for example from posts in this forum by a certain individual: *"people will always, things are always embellished in advertising." *"People need failure. It's necessary, and someone needs to do it in order for someone else to come out on top." *"There will always be failing students" These always/never statements are not proven truths. They are in fact false assumptions. These are known as conventional wisdom. Conventional wisdom is nothing more than a false assumption that is assumed to be a truth of the world. All the problems in the world are the result of nonsense conventional wisdom. Here is a nonsensical statement that has no basis in reality: "Injustice will always exists." People make such a false statement as conventional wisdom that is a truth of the world. They live by such fallacy. By embracing the existence of injustice, they ensure and perpetuate the existence of injustice. Can anybody give anymore examples of false assumptions that are deemed to be so called CONVENTIONAL WISDOM TRUTHS OF THE WORLD?
yes conventional wisdom is crap. it stems from lack of processing capacity and the resulting need to assume without knowing. then your statment that all the problems of the world stem from conventional wisdom is just more of the same crap - assumption based on inability to processes the whole data set.
yeah true, but in the end injustice always exists, so some of them work, so normal people wont accept about them being false.
Wrong. Every single problem in the world is the result of accepting the problems as inevitable according to the so called conventional wisdom. They are nothing more than assumptions that are accepted as truths only out of convention. Wrong.
You appear to have nullified yourself here. Anyway, how about "all people are created equal"? Or, "the rich get richer while the poor get poorer"? They seem to be pretty common wisdom without much empirical evidence to support them.
The second one falls into the category of "conventional wisdom" but the first depends on how you define it: not everyone's rights are respected and upheld, but you knew that.
The first one is a true statement. No single person in reality has rights above a next person. Conventional wisdom fallacy would state otherwise because it is focused on temporality. As for the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, I do not know what you mean. It sounds more like an economic tendency than realilty vs temporality convention.
A father of a raped child learns the rapist was not convicted because he was the county's only judge. The father ambushes the judge who is on his way to church one Sunday morning and blows the judge's head off. 1st degree murder. A person in a near starving condition and lost in the wilds comes upon an a small isolated farm with signs ("Private Property No Tresspassing - Don't Steal the peaches even if you are near starving") posted on a fence surrounding a grove of peach trees with juicy ripe peaches ready for picking. The person enters the grove, picks a few peaches filling her pockets and leaves. Theft. An emancipated 15 year old girl who is sexually active seduces her 22 year old devoutly Christian neighbor who submits to receiving an act of oral copulation only because he has been emotionally crippled by the cunning guile of the 15 year old seductress. The 22 year old adult male is convicted of felony statutory rape and sentenced to state prison for twenty-five years to life pursuant to a plea bargain arranged by his "defense" attorney and the county persecutors orifice. In an isolated community deep in the Brazilian Jungle the fathers of young pre-teen girls regularly perform copulaton with their daughters as a learning device. The daughters sometimes protest the event. Mr. Anonymous has confused general "criminal concepts" with "moral/ethical concepts" and has attempted to do what was complained of in the opening thread, that is, he has generalized "conventional wisdom" in a failed attempt to show exception to the thrust of this thread and therefore he argues we ought to accept with a shrug of the shoulders the realities of "injustice" ,"slavery", "racism", "sexism", "authoritarian political activities", "genocide", "state executions", "standard school curicula", "social norms", "criminal penalities for various chemical usages and activities". Mr. Ananymous is the current author and supporter of the movement, "you can't fight city hall", so he argues, just bend over and let city hall fuck you in the ass. A cave-man scenario. grog, agonizing for months without any sexual contact (he suffers from a severe case of halitosis) with a woman, enters grug's cave, whacks grug over the head with a club and drags grug's significant other (grug's current squeeze), gruga, by the hair over to his own cave and attempts to rape her. The effects of the halitosis has resulted in grog's temporary state of impotence and is unable to proceed any further than "a slight penetration." of the rape. Later the cave society meets and all agreed that grog's activities are the kinds of conduct that the social group requires protection from. They are about to drop grog over a cliff when someone in the group mentions how unfair it would be to terminate grog as there had been no such rule describimg his conduct as such that "dropping him off" was something that the rest of the group would administer as reaction procedures to "unlawful conduct" (translated from ancient groggurian languages: "if some mother fucker comes into your hol n' drags yo ho into his hol, denwee gonna drop that mofoin sumbich offa hiklifff so he don fuk wid no mo hos da ain his ho libbn in his hol.", even though similar situations had been manifest previously and were usually handled individually by the concerned parties. grug was a cripple so his ho hadda do eberthing da ahocandofohermanndacripled. They dropped grog offa hikliffs anyway until some latins cum ina cavtown talkin trash boud "ex post facto" laws. Moral and criminal conduct are generally separate concerns which is why the US Constitution has prohibited Congress and the States from enacting any bill of attainders. Of course, Congress, the States, the various judiciaries and administrative actions have raped, murdered, stolen and generally savagely waged total and complete agressive war on the prohibitions and limitations upon governmental activity of the various entities described. Of course the people, from where all power of government is derived have been neutralized to a state of impotence because of lameness, self-induced timidity and stupidity, personal and collective cowardice, have been subjected to brain dirtying propaganda, have surrendered the bulk of their soul, their honors, their sense of their own individuality, their lives and fortunes to the goose stepping, ersatz current governmental/political authority of secret gestapo/criminal conspirators, lounging around in comfort as seen clearly through the wide windows of high corporate office buildings usually described in part by markings such as, "Exxon Corporation","Standard Oil Company of America" ,"The United Nations", "Shell Oil Corporation", "Lockheed Martin Company", "The George Walker Bush Family","William Jefferson Clinton III", "Boeing Aircraft Company", "The Legislature of the State of Arizona", "The Catholic Church", "The Jesuit Society", (the latter two items now included in the general catagory of, 'White Collar Criminal Organizations'), "The United States Marine Corps - Siempre Fidelis", ", "_______", "__________", ....,"___________"..... The list goes on; one can easily fill in their own blanks. If one has any problem deciding 'which shoe fits which blank', then for the sake of their own personal safety (as well as protecting threats to inevitable personal embarrassment) they should stay out of the way and remove themselves as real and potential encumberances to social repairing dynamics and just watch -- perhaps they could sell peanuts and soda pop to other "buy standers". You know the drill. Geistkiesel Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! You all know the drill. [/indent]
Mr Anonymous idiot is a troll. He has never in his entie life provided legitimate discussion for his sole intention is to flame.
