Sup Forums btfo again

...

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=dF9V8POmuxg
youtube.com/watch?v=jiGsHCpBGg4
verdantlabs.com/politics_of_professions/
viriculture.com/defense-of-traditional-wisdom/
twitter.com/AnonBabble

This was true in the Berenstein timeline. In the Berenstain timeline, conservatives are the one's favored by facts. Plus we also get Trump.

Best timeline fukken confirmed

Plebbit is leaking in to Sup Forums
>Blow it up brothers!

Knowledge makes you a liberal. Experience makes you conservative.

Tell me, what liberal bias do the facts provided in this video have?
youtube.com/watch?v=dF9V8POmuxg

I think the distribution is biphasic
stupid people who have poor education are conservative
middle-ground people with education are liberals
very high IQ people with education often conservative

Plus I would argue reality has a conservative bias.

If reality had a liberal bias, multiculturalism and the American and European experiment would be succeeding without stopping.

I'm gonna shift us into an even newer timeline, hang on to your butts

Then why are liberal rejecting facts when it comes to trans-people, BLM, Islamic terrorism, and basic economics? There is a reason the left is scratching their heads at why they lost so badly a few weeks ago.

also
>tfw im a 4 year student and still did not become liberal. then again im going for a criminal justice degree and see the facts for myself and ugly our society really is

>Plebbit is capable of proving nothing.

Fact: As you grow older, you become more conservative. Why is that?

College lends to liberal beliefs because liberal professors teach you liberal facts. Not all college is bad, I must add.
So in this little echo chamber, void of any real world experience, yet full of book knowledge, you learn "how the world works" or so you think. By doing so in an echo chamber it feeds your liberal ideologies, you then converse with other people with the same ideologies and in turn they reinforce your liberal ideologies.

After you graduate, if you are lucky (and picked a legitimate degree that leads to getting a job) you start working. After working hard on your career and paying taxes, you start noticing a bunch of lazy fucks demanding they get what you have, but they dont want to put the same amount of work into it. You begin to think.

Either:
A) That echo chamber has fully consumed you and you agree with them (and probably end up becoming a professor or something)
B) You begin to resent the lazy fucks and gulf down a bunch of redpills exposing you to reality, where conservative views are based.

>Now return to plebbit

You have a low definition of BTFO.
Marxist Professors produce a bunch of Marxist Lib drones who need safe spaces when dealing with reality.

kek tell that to genetics

high society has a liberal bias, they are far from reality

youtube.com/watch?v=jiGsHCpBGg4

>quoting a fucking leaf

I will agree that Liberty is kind of bullshit. They do produce decent people, though. A few good friends of mine from law school went to Liberty for their undergrad.

>"Reality has a liberal bias"

Yeah, it's called Entropy

>Knowledge makes you a liberal.
I dunno about you, but the more history knowledge I get, the more I hate.

If that were true then STEM students would be more liberal while liberal arts students would be more conservative (since STEM students deal in facts while liberal arts deal in opinions). However we see the opposite so it's a bunk claim.

>criminal justice degree

Why do people do this? I'm being serious. Y'all get shat on by even the polisci people in law school.

Liberals are just modern day Sophists. There are no such things as "facts" to a liberal.

>STEM

Would people stop trying to make this a thing? Science, technology, engineering, and math are all very, very different disciplines, careers, majors, and lifestyles.

Oh my fucking god

I call it the Solomon effect.

>And I gave my heart to know wisdom, and to know madness and folly: I perceived that this also is vexation of spirit. For in much wisdom is much grief: and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow.

>reality has a liberal bias
>humanity spent 99.99% of their time with conservatives ideologies

Yet facts and reality do not play together kindly with them when they go against their own world view.

>Shitbaiting user OP btfo for eternity

I'm a classic fascist. How smart am I for choosing that Ideology?

Digits confirm

shut up fag

I actualy agree.
Going to a college and paying Dr. Rosenblat to spoonfeed you indoctrination makes you a liberal
Being a muh israel onetrue american conservative (tm) requires shielding yourself from facts
However being a traditionalist and a race realist requires being able to think for yourself.

This is everything Mao said. Huh.

> Reality has a liberal bias
> But when it doesn't it's bigoted and racist or a conspiracy theory

Wow, I guess you can't argue with that mountain of evidence.

>conservatives are le dumb and use opinions instead of facts
>this is fact and 100% not my personal opinion

>don't understand population genetics
>don't understand evolution
>don't understand economics
>don't understand maths
>citing Stephen Colbert as an authority on anything
>"Reality has a liberal bias"

These kids paid an exorbitant amount of money to attend school and they know less than the average student from 50 years ago.

College may not mean you are a liberal, but you are still fed Liberal Propaganda.

So you either come out liberal or a very jaded conservative.

NOT
AN
ARGUMENT

That's literally not an argument though

>reality has a liberal bias
according to what? social scientists?

Tell liberals that people's potential is primarily determined by their genetics and watch them squirm.

molyneux is that you?

If reality has a "liberal bias" then why are libtards trying to progress away from it?

checkmate, libtards

>in the words of Stephen Colbert
These people are like a parody of real humans

>critical thinking
>aligning with a political party

How would you argue against this then?
verdantlabs.com/politics_of_professions/
t. Genuinely curious
All sciences are dominated left and no "the Jews" or "echo chamber" except with proof, the second can be made

>Using a """""""""""""""""""""""""comedian"""""""""""""""""""""""" as the foundation of your ideology

indeed, hillshills and pansexual-Bern-outs have grown up thinking that conservatism is just Bush and the religious right. I feel bad for people that deny simple truths like race and the benefits of tradition.

relevant
viriculture.com/defense-of-traditional-wisdom/

>in the words of stephen colbert

Meh Maths is related to all of them. Engineering and science have quite different approach despite engineering utilising the principles of science.

That's easy m8. Scientists=Academia=liberal-leaning. People with STEM degrees don't only work in Academia you know.

ideologues on both sides believe that they are right and are using truth and facts rather than propaganda and foolishness.

only the left, however, has the gall to regularly make openly conceited claims of 'liberals have higher IQ's' 'liberals are more educated' 'facts and science, epic!' because they're primarily concerned with social consensus. they get their concept of reality from communal reference.

the right on the other hand has a concept that could perhaps be called, 'basedness', and we recognize a persons moral and philosophical vigor as a quality separate from the abstract capacity of a persons brain to process and remember data. we recognize people's value based on something besides sophistication.

the truth is that anyone attempting to reduce intellect to something as simple as 'having spent time in college' obviously has a steep angle in that bargain.

liberals are naive enough to think that it's not pretty obvious to others, and naive enough to think that they can simply avoid dissenting opinions and retain in propos their conceit that because they're sophisticated, educated, and intelligent, that their idea's are correct.

in reality, intelligent people are no more likely to be right or wrong, they're just right and wrong in more complicated and extravagant ways.

>in the words of stephen colbert

>(((Stephen Colbert)))

/thread

>facts make you more liberal
>reality has a liberal bias
Facts don't make you liberal, your personality does. Liberals score high on openness and conservatives score high on conscientiousness. Openness also causes a personality more compatible with university and intellectualism. If facts caused you to become liberal than anyone with any good amount of knowledge would be liberal, but one can observe this quite objectively to be simply not the case. Furthermore reality does not have a liberal bias, liberals have a liberal bias on how they perceive reality. Liberals unconsciously ignore danger and risk and divert more attention to positive stimuli instead so they constantly ignore/forget the failures of their own past policies and whenever they fail again blame conservatives and try again and again because they are incapable of accurately perceiving negative events.
t. poli sci major with focus on political psychology

The liberal fucktards are stuck in the past, when certain groups genuinely were oppressed and when religious dogma was more important that scientific facts. At that point, yes, reality had a liberal bias. However, that era is long gone, and the dumbfuck Republicans who believe in creationism are the only remnants.

The fact of the matter is that reality has an anti-authoritarian bias. Back in the day, the religious conservatives made the rules and shaped the morals of mainstream society. Liberals, who were classical liberals, not modern day liberals, opposed this way of thinking in favor of science, philosophy and education. Starting in the 60s, the liberals have gradually gained power, and today the far-left extremists are the ones who define morals and preach dogmatic, totalitarian bullshit. The conservatives are the ones fighting for free speech and a world view based on scientific evidence.

All the censorship, outrage, mental breakdown, crying and refusal to have open, academic discussion on taboo subjects, shows that the modern liberals are just as bad, if not worse, than the old school Christian conservatives. "Equality" and "social justice" form the core of the left's religious cult.

if you're allowed to define 'success', you're allowed to define whether reality has a left wing or right wing bias.

leftism is relativism, the Right believes in objective truth and reality.

one can always obfuscate and complicate a matter further and thus 'filibuster' a concise declaration of positive truth; however, it requires a great deal of energy and clarity to establish on objective principles a declaration of positive truth...

as stated above, their socially-oriented precepts allow them to dismiss any information that doesn't conform to the communal approval as 'fake facts'. they facilitate this using the concepts taught to them by relativism, which is the heart of cultural marxism, the weapon produced by the frankfurt school.

there is a limit to ones knowledge, ones intelligence, ones ability to think and decide. but there is no limit to ones capacity for ignorance and obfuscation to relativity any subject. i think we can see pretty clearly the cultural mechanic here.

a leftist can, without your consent, go on and on and on because no substance is required, every successive smokescreen and complication is free to them, while it requires great stamina to cut through those cobwebs, and success for the advocate of the right requires consent on the part of his opponent. positive affirmation, which our society is designed to teach as being impossible.

the necessity of positive affirmation to our lives, and to success, and survival in reality, however, means it can never be fully crushed out, and will return at every chance, like weeds in the crack of a sidewalk.

the two sides, left and right, are NOT the same, not at ALL.

>the truth is that anyone attempting to reduce intellect to something as simple as 'having spent time in college' obviously has a steep angle in that bargain.
Are there any studies that show the average IQ in colleges over time? I can only imagine it's dropped drastically.

You mean "indoctrination" not "knowledge"

>Posting reddit as proof

lolwut. Also not true. Czech out these facts liberals try and shelter themselves from

If liberals love facts so much, why do they try to censor whenever a Muslim commits a crime? And why do they ignore the reality of race and IQ?

exactly

i would assume out of hand that as you increase the percentage of people attending college, you decrease the average IQ of people attending.

IQ isn't irrelevant but it's sincerely not the be-all end-all of a persons estimation. in fact, i'd say that it's merely the final extent of the degree to which we can make a persons estimation quantitative whatsoever... which is not the greatest part of the job! estimating a person simply can't be done on a calculator.

the fact that this implies in no way a relative or subjective element to a persons estimation and his worth genuinely confuses the liberal left. hence their harping on about how much better they are by half-measures that Right wingers see as useful but not invaluable.

>Hahaha its really the liberals who deny reality
>in the same breath asserts we hoped dimensions back in '98

You're not making a great case for us here

If this held any truth to it, liberals would not require appeal to emotion as their argumentative basis.
Truth be told pre 2k conservative arguments were based off religious context and assumptions, following 2000 and the majority of the west swinging far left, we now have applicable data to back the fact that the lefts world perception is an immediate failure.

Moral arguments were never enough, degeneracy prevailed and now has become so deeply embedded with the modern pop culture that it invokes emotional responses to even question it in presence of liberals.

Q: X does Y thirty more times statistically, therefor we should implicate Z.

A: What about X feelings! Y is a right wing conspiracy created by Russia.

It's bizarre to me how the most disgusting behavioral and moral choices have become almost instinctual to so many in such a short frame of time.

dang

how do we keep losing so badly?

why? it's a religious concept that explains reality in ways beyond which science is capable. science can only tell us what a thing is, what its properties are, and with difficulty, how several objects interact - it can never tell us what those things MEAN, and what to DO about them. they can't create a NARRATIVE to reality, or a story that tells us where we fit into it.

you're legitimately on the wrong path if you're comparing the estimations of the objective world and results of actions, with the explanations that humans create to describe the meaning we find in the world.

and after all it's in no way impossible that we shift dimensions, whatever the fuck that actually means.

it's not something that you can "disprove" with a negation, you can only assert a more holistic and comprehensive paradigm.

>i would assume out of hand that as you increase the percentage of people attending college, you decrease the average IQ of people attending.
Yes, along with the increased mass of mediocre women and minorities who get in because of gender quotas or affirmative action.
The point is that being an educated person 50 or 100 years ago was much more prestigious than it is today, because universities had much higher standards, and the average, uneducated person didn't have access to the enormous amount of information that is available to them today.

>IQ isn't irrelevant but it's sincerely not the be-all end-all of a persons estimation.
It's an important factor and is generally a very good way to calculate a person's general intelligence. The closer you get to the natural sciences or STEM, the more important raw IQ is.

>le reality has le libreal bis XDXDX
>minion avatar

Stupid people who have poor education in America (looking at intelligence bellcurves) are mud minorities. They are overwhelmingly liberal.

A subset of white people who don't have college degrees voting like 57% one way does not validate this meme that 'hurr dumb people are conservative'

Like 40% of the country is sub 100iq people who vote 85% liberal.

>complains about people who don't face reality of the world.
>thinks real politik is gross.

Maybe if some of these fucks actually had ptsd they could have some dissociation and see themselves for just one fucking minute. I'm tired of having to watch them eat their own shit.

But when morality is subjective and reality consists of objectivity, how can 'liberalism' have the monopoly on the truth?

certainly in order to deal with complicated subjects and abstractions, you have to have the horsepower to do it. so if you're going to be a systems engineer or a statistical analyst or something, yes, you have to have a high IQ.

that doesn't mean that a person who can do triple integrals in order to map out the magnetic flux of a hydroelectric powerplants dynamo's is going to be correct on whether immigration such as in europe is good or bad, moral or immoral, etc.

you do have to be able to solve problems such as IQ tests for to do complex tasks. but there are many, many things which that test will not indicate. many things it does mean, many things it doesn't mean.

that's not convenient for liberal leftists.

>postmodern liberal opinions are facts
>implying culture always progresses linearly and positively and we've suddenly reached correct objective beliefs in the past couple of decades
>the belief that millions of people who previously voted for obama became racist sexists overnight is based in objectivity and reality

Drumpf BTFO! His campaign is finished!

>Heh, I bet this conservative doesn't even believe in evolution. I've got all the FACTS ON MY SIDE.

>Wow, you believe that the different races that evolved in different environments ended up with DIFFERENT average characteristics. I have nothing else to say about that, so I'll just call you racist!

>Look, all the FACTS AND STATISTICS PROVE white privilege! White dudes are like 90% of the congressman and CEOs!

>What are you going on about with this Jewish thing! Who cares if they are overrepresented in media companies, YOURE A CONSIPRICAY THEORIST!

>sharing your 12 year old opinions from plebbit
saged

underrated post

>that doesn't mean that a person who can do triple integrals in order to map out the magnetic flux of a hydroelectric powerplants dynamo's is going to be correct on whether immigration such as in europe is good or bad, moral or immoral, etc.

No, but it does mean that they're better equipped to do the necessary research and to analyze the data than someone who doesn't have the same intellectual capacity and just relies on emotions to make their decisions.

Of course, there seems to be a problem in the STEM community where a lot of them don't do the necessary research and just go by mainstream information when forming their political views. Make a lie big enough, and all that.

The people who do the necessary research usually keep quiet because they don't want to be ostracized from the scientific community. Pretty much every scientist, sociologist and psychologist who's done studies that related to race and IQ are pariahs in the scientific community.

>circlejerking
>assumptions based by 0 evidence
>willful ignorance of real events
>quoting colbert like he was a philosopher

It's a reddit lefties thread!

Ahh thank you, dude

>In the words of Stephen Colbert, "Reality has a liberal bias"

I cannot utter any comprehensible words in all of the known languages to express my horror at someone stringing a sentence like that unironically

One thing I learned going to uni is that the left wing is actually very anti science. They're huge on the idea of subjective reality. There's no such thing as truth or fact, only your subjective perception of reality.

Can we go to one where everything's like this one except I'm balls deep in sad Huma?

That's what reading a leaf post feels like to everyone else here
Doesn't feel too good does it

>>>>>circlejerking
How ignorant on you? We do that on both sides

Most leafposts have been utterly cancerous, no point in hiding it. I think it stems mostly from the fact that leafland is helplessly liberal or bait

Well, the main problem is the double-speak of the word liberalism.

"Liberals" ruined liberalism.

Just like "feminists" ruined feminism. Faggots ruined homosexuality etc.

So when someone makes reddit post talking about "liberal ideology", they mean in theory. "Liberals" don't practice liberal ideology, they practice toxicity.

This is why it's hard for me to debate on these issues when words have their meaning dissolved:
1. Do you mean racist or 'racist'?
2. Was it rape or 'rape'?
3. Is he a misogynist or a 'misogynist'?
4. A homophobe or 'homophobe'?
5. Do you mean literally or 'literally'?

That's what happens when you have energy building up in your nervous system because life in a developed country in 2016 is too easy and without adversaries - so you have to extend the definitions to make issues out of non-issues.

>in reality, intelligent people are no more likely to be right or wrong

You are a fucking idiot, ignorance and intelligence are not of equal value.

Once upon a time there were conservatives you could respect as intellectual, where did they go?

>that picture
That should have been a major scandal.

>Being smug, because you think a TV comedian is intelligent and you share his opinion

Why must you immigrants bring your shit culture to Sup Forums. Go back to your cucksite with your votes and usernames

That's funny, because the more experience I have, the more liberal and anti-white I become.

...

>No, but it does mean that they're better equipped to do the necessary research and to analyze the data than someone who doesn't have the same intellectual capacity and just relies on emotions to make their decisions.

and they're better equipped to obfuscate and falsify, as well. and observably just as prone to as anyone.

whether you act emotionally or rationally isn't really related to intelligence either, that's related to character, which doesn't improve with intelligence enough to be used as a predictor.

intelligence is horsepower. it's not a measure of accuracy. if you're rating the speed with which a person can determine the load-bearing capacity of a bridge or fixture, that can be predicted through intelligence, experience, training. if you're rating a person in their capacity to come to accurate conclusions regarding the nature of the human ethical environment and the proper ends of a moral man, raw horsepower is not only not of much use, but it will create exaggerated failure if used incorrectly or to ignoble ends.

the bias today is to over-value intelligence and to make it out to be much more than it is.

a person who is right about the world and themselves, if intelligent, will produce quite powerful order in their environment and do very great things. a person who is right about the world and themselves and unintelligent, will not accomplish as much or as greatly, but will have done well in their own capacity.

a person who is wrong about the world and themselves, if foolish, will stumble along in quiet misery and failure. a person who is wrong about the world and themselves, if intelligent, will do a great deal of damage and create quite bad things in their environment.

Not even Muh Tradition kind of guy but there's something inherently beautiful to these old cityscapes and how everyone seems to function in them.

Conservatism is the notion of preserving that which is good about society. How could anyone disagree with this principle?

nice architecture + greenery + that's the nice part of town, not ghetto-topia across town

>facts make you liberal

Here's a fact for you: African Americans have an average IQ around 20 points lower than white students, and test score gaps persist even when controlling for class.

He's not wrong.

BUT THAT'S WHITE PEOPLES FAULT.

>Conservatism is the notion of preserving that which is good about society.
Yeah, like hatred of all non-human life, forcing jewish religion on everyone and killing people to steal their things and territory! Who could be against this? Oh yeah, everyone.

This is only true because libtards major in bullshit like "Hurt feelingsology" and "Afro-centric ego stroking"

Go into a business discipline and all of the core professors are redpilled as fuck. Even mentioning marxism/socialism gets you shit on.

'If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain.'

Redditfags btfo

>Liberals

>Literally Feelings > Facts

>Literally believe empirical evidence, observable and measurable objective facts are outweighed by emotional subjectivity

>Being a conservative requires shielding yourself from reality

It's quite the opposite. It generally requires a stubborn adherence to reality and an unwillingness to engage in abstract thought about possible realities.

Which is why they are traditionalists who often cling to "this is the way it is and how it works" while liberals will be more open to taking chances on new social ventures. Because they aren't as tightly bound by facts and reality.

>teaching you facts and how to think critically
>more liberal

We're finding more and more people are becoming more and more liberal precisely because they do not wish to engage in critical thinking or engage with facts and prefer instead dogma that reinforces their emotional comfort.

>Reality has a liberal bias
>Stephen Colbert

Liberals found out the hard way that this "reality" they have constructed has as many holes in it as that constructed by the fringe religious right.