https://archive.ph/r3tgY
I guess I should have written a title
>>534737922Sure. But now, every article backing itself up on the word of "experts" must include:>a complete list of experts who said what was said in the article, not merely "the experts">the background of those experts, including personal information like religion and ethnicity, not to discriminate what they say on the basis of both, but to determine conflicts of interest (a muslim will never tell you eating pork meat is good for you; a jew will never tell you male genital mutilation is a bad thing, even though female genital mutilation is recognized as a violation of human rights)>what, especifically, these "experts" did to earn their expert label>an obviously, a complete list of the institutions they've been a part of and what their role was in each of them; some institutions are heavily discredited in public opinion. This is not a problem with the public who "don't trust the science", it's a problem with the institution and their poor reputational management. For example, I'm less likely to believe what comes from the mouth of a person who belongs to an institution with heavy DEI practices. I don't trust the "science" of an institution that doesn't believe in merit. If these "experts" want to be taken seriously, they need to do better.
>2026They're still mad about 2016.
>>534738934>>534738934>Take the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001.>This was presented as an argument that it must have actually been a controlled demolition. Meanwhile, experts reconstructed and calculated the collapse precisely, finding that those 14 to 16 seconds correspond roughly to the expected timeframe.lmfao, you should believe his expert opinion on experts, what you do write now as a layman by giving your own opinion is just wrong you subhumanniggerfaggot
>>534737922>he deliberrately aims to challenge tabooslol the exact opposite is the case, questioning the mainstream narrative is the forbidden fruit.
>>534739182>It is fundamentally irrational not to adopt expert judgments>You misunderstand me. I believe it is wrong to give weight to a layperson's judgment on factual matters even if the layperson actually happens to be right for once.You were only right that one time!Hence your opinions on factual matters shouldn't matter!!?>You then ask a certified mental-math professional to check the calculation. He is having a very bad day and arrives at a different, incorrect result. Even so, you—as a layperson—should adopt the professional's judgment!>As a rule, experts already know all the reasons and arguments that I know as a layperson anyway.Experts know everything even though they still need a gazillion tax payer dollars to conduct research on women studies!>Therefore, I fundamentally must not take my own reasons into account, not even a little bit, because I must assume that the expert has already considered them. And considered them better.
>>534739298>Grundmann: All psychological data points in exactly the opposite direction.>Grundmann: ALL psychological data points in exactly the opposite direction.Grundmann: ALL PSYCHOLOGICAL DATA POINTS in exactly the opposite direction.
>>534739368>We fall victim to numerous fallacies and biases.NOT THE EXPERS THOUGHLet's see Thomas Geundmann's expert opinion of gender based discrimination and forced military service(and other hassles related to it) over men alone!
>>534739414>laypeople are allowed to rely on their own reflectionsohh thanks for allowing us to rely on out reflections mr.thomasnigger, unfortunately, 4you, I don't need your permission because I am going to pay a nafri to stab you in the throat in front of your family, hahahahah experts says that would be antisemitic
>challenging taboos>by telling people to blindly trust self appointed authority figuresIt's only "taboo" because it's completely and utterly retarded and history is littered with time periods where this was in place and we've seen the direct results; all of which were negative.
>>534738934Very Anti-Semitic. I urge you to browse the ADL website and educate yourself on such harmful ways of thinking.
>>534739479>We don't know for certain, but we have good reasons to assume that contemporary sciences are a reliable source.What are the reasons Thomas?Is it because we use electricity and know it works; we can also rely on circumcision science studies and the political science, and refuse to criminalise torturing baby boys and little boys on their pps under the ECHR?
>>534739622Forcing men to be drone fodder in the meat grinder while the women record fury porn in EU or whatnot as refugees is not slavery CHUD! The science has settled.Women can kill their babies and that wouldn't be murder, but if you kill a conscription enforcer that's murder and SAD!You must listen to the experts Chud!
>>534739720Studies shows that middle class should use paper straws while our basketball niggers and such flying jumbo private jetsto play ball is actually good and healthy for the environment!
>>534739859Studies Show*
>>534737922As a scientist it's my expert opinion that Thomas Grundmann should kill himself
>>534740031>I am an expert in terrorism with specialisations in asymmetrical warfare, guerrilla warfare and scholastic terrorism; and I SAY Thomas Grundmann's domicile should be bombed to the ground, and hisself should be be burned alive after getting crucified
>>534740152>I am an expert in shitposting, and my unquestionable expert opinion is that everyone should call Der Philosoph Thomas Grundmann a niggerfaggot
>>534738527
Thomas Grundmann: Thinking for oneself as a source of conspiracy theorieshttps://youtu.be/RVzxHfUmnjU
>>534740279We're not taught critical thinking though. It's deliberately suppressed for the masses, who are told you don't need to study it, that it's innate and that you can just freestyle it.
Americans are right about mass shooting, sometime you just have to shoot these people in mass in one of their gay little meet-ups, and this is my expert opinion as one of world's most renowned terror posters
>>534740333These are the types of freaks that international investing and banking gave the societal steering wheel to because they are devout control freaks that can't bite the hand on there heads. Carp, Thiel, Musk, Bezos, Starmer, any kraut politician.
>>534737922Seems Grundmann is also a Jewgle Scholar.That would explain the message of "believe only jews and their AI pilpul machine."
>Take the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001. They eventually collapsed after the planes struck.Why is Thomas the layman is giving his blatantly false opinion on the subject? Experts has already concluded that it was a flying pickup truck instead
>>534737922>A shabbos on the (((ruling class)))’s payroll says goyim should listen to the shabbos on (((the ruling class)))’s payroll>goyim are this stupid and easy to manipulate
>>534740279>time to give up on logic & reason
>>534740279>checkmate you chuds>it was real, in my mind.
>Here’s a concise TL;DR of the interview:>Philosopher Thomas Grundmann argues that modern knowledge is so specialized that non-experts can no longer meaningfully judge most technical or scientific claims. Because of this “division of epistemic labor,” he claims people should generally defer to experts rather than rely on their own reasoning when evaluating factual questions.He challenges traditional Enlightenment ideals of independent thinking, saying they are outdated and contribute to problems like conspiracy theories and anti-science attitudes. Instead, he defends strong trust in scientific authority: if something is supported by the scientific community, laypeople should accept it—even if it feels counterintuitive or “absurd.”Grundmann acknowledges that humans value understanding, but says that understanding should be separated from belief: people can think through ideas “offline,” but should ultimately defer judgment to experts in real-world decisions.His provocative conclusion is that it is often irrational for laypeople to override expert consensus, even when their own intuition disagrees.The interviewer pushes back throughout, raising concerns about blind trust, expert disagreement, and how to identify trustworthy authorities, but Grundmann maintains that scientific institutions are still the most reliable system we have.In short: he defends a strong pro-expert, anti-independent-judgment stance on factual/technical matters, arguing that lay skepticism does more harm than good in a highly specialized knowledge society.
>>534737922This argues for intellectual stagnation. There's always going to be situations where a certain phenomena or situation cannot be understood by "experts" of said fields. If there's no-one to question or doubt them when needed, then it becomes a circlejerk of elitist academics stunting any progress in their respective fields.
Science is for sale.Dont listen to scientists. Anything intelligent they have to say is kept a secret and sold. Anything they say publicly they are paid for, one way or another, and are likely lies.
sounds like a poof
