soj.ooO
BETA
The social discussion platform
Home
Pochas
Channels
Videos
Log in
Sign up
Sign up
Home
Pochas
Channels
Videos
Log in
Sign up
Parent Post: The non-falsifiable premise killed Charlie Kirk.
gracejoy
·
9/14/2025, 11:27:52 PM
·
permalink
"*\[A\] non-falsifiable premise \[is\] a premise which may not be questioned, that no debate may be countenanced, for which no doubt may be tolerated. ...\[Charlie\] was murdered b/c of the impassioned belief in a non-falsifiable premise. ...He couldn't be allowed to advance even the idea that the premise might be questioned, debated, seen from more than one perspective. And it really didn't matter what the premise was*." I agree. It's become an un-said rule, similar to the Communist practice of conditioning people to self-censor by randomly targeting people w/vague charges of Wrongthink, so witnesses will fear the same. Perhaps it not mattering what a premise is helps by leaving nothing one can pinpoint for objection, thereby furthering the goal of blind obedience. "*Contradictions do not exist. Whenever you think that you are facing a contradiction, check your premises. You will find that one of them is wrong*." ~Ayn Rand
Save
Cancel
3
bumps
Share
S
saarnok
·
9/15/2025, 2:00:00 AM
·
permalink
In my opinion a significant reason for the extreme tendency toward violence on the left is the abandonment of religious beliefs. It almost seems that people require believing things which can't be objectively determined. Some more, some less, but with most people they seem to just *need* articles of faith to believe in. In addition, it seems the percentage of one's mindspace which can be founded on these beliefs can approach totality. Just as one can simply believe things, the negative is also true. We can also simply disbelieve in an equally non-objective fashion to prevent the formation of inconvenient ideas. We saw in the realm of "holocaust denial" that debating with those who refuse to simply accept "The Holocaust" as presented must not be debated, their narratives must not be examined lest we contribute to their evil. Then we saw the same thing with "global warming", "racism", "vaccines" and I'm sure a host of other examples should we but recall them. "Conservatives" typically apply a greater portion of the mental real estate to explicitly religious concerns, enabling the exercise of non-falsifiable premises for the most part outside the visible world while being informed about human decency from a seemingly transcendent source which is resistant to morphing from treating everyone decently to treating only those who share your beliefs decently. On the left there's very little of their non-falsifiable premises outside the day-to-day world. Reality is to be as they define it, hence the relentless policing of language and words. Word's meanings are what THEY say they are, today. Kirk was murdered by a radical lefty in coordination with his trans lover and a group of trans/furrys, because his perception of male and female could not be swayed by declarative statements of people who genuinely believe they define reality. I found it amusing that anyone even entertained the idea that perhaps he was killed by a right winger. Not because it's absolutely impossible, but because the likelihood is so vastly overwhelmed by the likelihood he was killed by exactly the sort of person who actually did it.
Save
Cancel
1
bump
Share
Signature
Loading…
Verify locally
Close
