Propaganda -- Mephisto's sig

[President Bush]

Virtually every type of propaganda mentioned so far can be argued to be a benefit to the target.

Dude, what happens when you totally can't remember their slogan?

 

[Mycroft]

I disagree some forms of propaganda are good...

Even propaganda that promotes a good cause?

Please allow me to respond to your most recent post by stating a quick observation.

Concerning your idea that World War One propaganda posters helped persuade the common guy to buy Liberty Bonds, thus benefiiting that common guy... who do you think actually profited from that purchase?

I believe the answer is the du Pont Company, Bethlehem Steel and US Steel, along with various copper and chemical companies.

Do you believe things would have been better for the “little guy” if we had lost WWI and WWII? Do you believe it’s impossible for the “little guy” to benefit at the same time as a large corporation does? Do you believe we should not have fought and won the world wars?

As far as your AIDS poster goes, well, I don't think I've dodged a thing. You say I criticize the quality of this propaganda?

Hardly. It appears to me a nice bit by a glamour-industry mindset promoting a fashionable accoutrement, nicely complementing those designer jeans.

Let’s be clear, are you claiming AVERT had no interest in promoting condom use?

Are you claiming they promoted condom display as a way of dodging the promotion of condom use?

Let’s pick a different AIDS poster:

Does this make a fashion statement? Or does it promote an important positive message aimed at limiting the spread of AIDS?

Am not denying that, of course, the use of condoms helps prevent the transmission of STDs. But their use isn't what's promoted in your poster. Their display is what is promoted.

You seem to be implying that AVERT is some sinister organization that wants to promote the death of its very constituents, but I hope I’m misunderstanding you.

My question is unchanged. Though I think you misunderstand it, somehow. So I'll just try again...

Skepticism attempts to employ objective, universally valid criteria of rationality and truth - science - in exploring phenomena such as UFOs, faith healing, speaking to the dead, alternative medicines, ghosts and other paranormal goings-on... always continuing to investigate, never sticking to a definite position.

Yet you agreed that the JREF fits your definition of propaganda:


Can you explain?

Yes I can, but first I would like you to deal with your statement that the JREF is "reduced" to "just" promoting doctrine. Will you either explain how that works or withdraw it? Can you do that before we move on?

 

[President Bush]

Even propaganda that promotes a good cause?



Do you believe things would have been better for the “little guy” if we had lost WWI and WWII? Do you believe it’s impossible for the “little guy” to benefit at the same time as a large corporation does? Do you believe we should not have fought and won the world wars?



Let’s be clear, are you claiming AVERT had no interest in promoting condom use?

Are you claiming they promoted condom display as a way of dodging the promotion of condom use?

Let’s pick a different AIDS poster:

Does this make a fashion statement? Or does it promote an important positive message aimed at limiting the spread of AIDS?



You seem to be implying that AVERT is some sinister organization that wants to promote the death of its very constituents, but I hope I’m misunderstanding you.

Your new AIDS poster has a positive message?

Yes I can, but first I would like you to deal with your statement that the JREF is "reduced" to "just" promoting doctrine. Will you either explain how that works or withdraw it? Can you do that before we move on?

What did my post that you invoke say again?

I'm not interested in breaking our "truce". So please do not take my following question in a way you might find unfairly critical, Mycroft. I appreciate you hanging in there with me on this subject.

Can propaganda be wholly objective? Doesn't seem that way to me.

Assuming that skepticism attempts to employ objective, universally valid criteria of rationality and truth - science - in exploring phenomena such as UFOs, faith healing, speaking to the dead, alternative medicines, ghosts and other paranormal goings-on... I'm wondering where it becomes reduced to just promoting doctrine.

Just a question.

I've said a few times now that (to me) having an attitude of skepticism seemed opposed to following doctrine. You haven't complained so I'll go ahead and assume you've no problem with that.

Going with that, it seems apparent (to me) that a change from a superior point of view - skepticism - to an inferior point of view - following doctrine - involves a reduction.

At the time I posted what seems to have you confused I choose to use the language "becomes reduced to just promoting doctrine".

I'll just limit my use of adverbs when corresponding with you in the future, Mycroft. Whoops, sorry.

Ready to move on?

 

[RandFan]

I've said a few times now that (to me) having an attitude of skepticism seemed opposed to following doctrine. You haven't complained so I'll go ahead and assume you've no problem with that.

? Now you are simply twisting the subject.

1.) Nothing about JREF suggests that those who are associated with the JREF must follow it's doctrine. Randi wants skeptics not disciples. That doesn't change the fact that the JREF is systematically propagating information.

2.) No one in this thread has suggested that the JREF simply wants people to follow their doctrine.

JREF wants people to think for themselves. Hell, question the skeptics. I doubt Randi minds if people take a skeptical view of JREF. Just be intellectually honest and objective in your skepticism.

Going with that, it seems apparent (to me) that a change from a superior point of view - skepticism - to an inferior point of view - following doctrine - involves a reduction.

Straw-man, no one has ever suggested that anyone simply "follow doctrine". That the JREF has goals and is propagating information does not mean that they want anyone to simply follow their doctrine. No one is talking about the behavior of the listener. We are only talking about the goals and behavior of JREF which is to propagate information to achieve a goal.

So, can you dispense with the straw men? Perhaps stick with what Mycroft is arguing and not make things up?

 

[Mycroft]

I'll just limit my use of adverbs when corresponding with you in the future, Mycroft. Whoops, sorry.

Ready to move on?

Actually, I'm ready to bow out. You're not responding to the points I raise and your own arguments are just gainsaying.

It's okay with me if you disagree on the issue of propaganda. The discussion itself was interesting to a certain extent, but when you become non-responsive to the points raised then it's just an endurance contest, and I have no interest in that.

RandFan has a lot more patience than I do, and his logic is impecable. If you want to continue, you have a partner.

Ciao.

 

[President Bush]

Ladies and gentlemen, I'm happy to declare the end of major combat operations.