Just about everywhere I look, I've found that many of the arguments are generalized and are not supported by actual, raw source data from credible institutions. When data is provided, it's cited to a "news" source or from a "study" that people found on Facebook or Twitter. I guess people really do fall for that click-bait. This is shameful, given our occupations and educations. As a person who loves a good debate, this is extremely frustrating.
While you are spreading comps, scrubbing precedents or learning how to use the mid-year convention properly, I highly recommend listening to this exchange, whether you agree with him or not. This, my tree-swinging primate friends, is how to property debate subjects in a sensible, fact-based, feelings-free manner.
https://www.facebook.com/pg/Ben-Shapiro-203805062…
He almost reminds me of Milton Friedman. Simple, fact-based logic derived from outcomes as opposed to intentions.
While I do not agree with everything that this speaker says, I do wholeheartedly agree that if there is a specific, identifiable case of racism, sexism, etc., I'm right there with you to shut that person or policy down. But please, for the love of logic and reasoning, I beg you to stop with the generalities, regardless of political preference. We use data and cold-hard, emotionless facts derived from outcomes, not intentions to drive our decisions at our desks every single day, yet we use feelings (with either party) and check our brains at the door when it comes to our political decisions and activist causes? That makes zero sense.
