In article >, "Dutch" >
wrote:

> "Ron" > wrote in message
> ...
> > In article >, "Dutch" >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> "Ron" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> > In article >, "Dutch" >
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> "Ron" > wrote
> >> >>
> >> >> > "A pound of salt" is precisely how I view all information, yet, you
> >> >> > consider that among other things as devil's advocate, disagreement
> >> >> > with
> >> >> > conventional wisdom, radical chic and so on.
> >> >>
> >> >> You appear to have a tendency to scoff at "conventional wisdom" for no
> >> >> other
> >> >> reason than it's popular. The reason I say so is that the questions,
> >> >> conclusions and arguments you present have frequently been clearly
> >> >> nonsensical. Based on that observation I can't believe that you have
> >> >> examined "conventional wisdom" critically, so I assume you reject it
> >> >> as
> >> >> an
> >> >> exercise in non-conformity, not skepticism.
> >> >
> >> > Conventional wisdom is a general term that you applied to those things
> >> > for which you agree. A feel good proposition, if you ask me.
> >>
> >> It doesn't mean *I* necessarily agree with it, it refers to ideas which
> >> are
> >> widely accepted.
> >
> > Arguments from popularity.
> >
> >> > Agreement with X because it is popular amounts to a logical fallacy.
> >>
> >> I know that. Disagreement with X because it is popular also amounts to a
> >> logical fallacy.
> >
> > That is either/or thinking -- more of the false dilemma.
>
> Wake up Ron!!!! I presented no dilemma.

Of course you did. I just stopped commenting on when it was happening.

> > You are offering me two choices, agree or believe the information versus
> > disagree or disbelieve the information.
>
> I didn't offer you ANY choices, I stated a fact that you need to get a grip
> on, "Disagreement with X because it is popular amounts to a logical fallacy"

You have consistently presented two choices or two interpretations --
this OR that. A false dilemma.

> > I consider a third option, it is
> > information that can be believed or disbelieved and still be held as
> > information.
>
> You're wrong, information should not be believed OR disbelieved until you
> assess it for yourself, it should be taken in and held provisionally.

Which is what I've been saying all along -- this includes what you have
loosely termed "conventional wisdom".

> > this goes back week's Dutch. I clearly pointed out to you that I found
> > many, many of your statement to be black and white, either/or, or false
> > dilemmas.
>
> You're out to lunch.

I can eat a sandwich and recognize it for what it is -- I think my
sanity is very much intact. People with perceptual problems and no
control aren't likely to be able to manage that reality very well.