The 1st Amendment is a MUCH MUCH bigger threat to America than the 2nd Amendment. (An extra thousand deaths per month? Who cares! There’d still be 200,000 dead Americans every month.)
It is the 1st Amendment that is destroying our country. Just for starters it provokes disinformation and unifies haters. Susan Rice says
I expect to be attacked by BOTH the Left and the Right for this post. But note that I am not calling for a direct repeal of the First Amendment (as if that were even possible). (I’m an INTP not like most of you, who are INTJ’s .) I just want us all to FIRST grok what the real problems are; THEN we can seek solutions. … If it’s not too late.
Leave the Constitution alone (speaking generally). Social Media is only an issue if there is too much censorship, like other venues of expression. Hiding words and ideas does not inhibit thoughts and reality. The problems will still exist, just will be masked, while taking freedom from the greater and responsible majority.
Another idiot. A Myers-Briggs test asks “Are you an introvert?”, phrasing that question five different ways. At the end it tells you whether you’re an introvert or not!
One can make complaints about such a test, e.g.
(a) it just tells you what you already knew, or
(b) it can be manipulated (an extrovert might answer the questions pretending to be an introvert)
… but calling it “pseudo-scientific bullshit” shows a staggering level of ignorance and/or confusion. The claim that Jupiter in square with Venus shows introversion is pseudo-science. How, pray tell, is answering “Yes” to the question “Are you an introvert?” in the same category?
Of course it is. How would I know if I’m an introvert or not? It’s cool to be an introvert these days, so plenty of people have convinced themselves that they’re deep and self-reflecting instead of what they actually are, which is just plain boring. People lie all the time, and they lie to themselves the most.
I’m not sure what the argument is. Anyway, social media has no intrinsic link to the first amendment that I can see. Also I don’t think USA has the free-est speech in the world so why would they be the only ones in trouble?
Some European countries ban hate speech which is legal in the U.S.
Also, much “free speech” in the U.S. is served up by politicians or trolls in the pay of big corporations. This is much less common in Europe, in part because they don’t have an infatuation with treating Freedom of Speech as an invitation to the loudest, best-financed liars.
Do you really want the current administration deciding what speech is to be allowed and disallowed? If you do, when the ship of state inevitably rights itself and the current administration is just an aberration in the rear view mirror, do you want the administration that takes over deciding?
The difference between libertarians and everybody else on the political spectrum is that everybody else dreams how wonderful it will be if their friends are voted into power, and grant government power accordingly while libertarians dream how horrible it will be if their enemies are voted into power, and grant government power accordingly.
Again, I do NOT advocate repeal of the First Amendment. I am an INTP, not an INTJ. I am describing a very serious problem facing the U.S.A.
I do not have a solution.
I get that domestic division is a huge problem, but I don’t see how the 1st Amendment makes this worse. Such divisions would remain with or without the 1st Amendment.
I’m not sure if you are putting on an act in this thread or not. I suspect so, as your posting history indicates an effort to back assertions and a dictinct lack of varying font sizes.
But since you ask, Meyer-Briggs is pseudo-science because it’s based mostly on untested, unverified bunkum. Yes, introversion/extroversion is measurable and useful. Some problems here: it’s only 1 of the four axes in Meyer-Briggs, it’s presented as a binary either/or thing, the test itself is inconsistent providing different answers on repeated trials (not for everybody but for enough people to be troubling), and both academic and professional psychologists largely eschew its use (yes, they do use introversion/extroversion but again, just 1 axis out of several).
It’s pseudo-scientific in that it posits the existence of 16 essential human personality categories based on four bivalent traits. There’s no scientific basis to support choosing those four pairs of traits as essential or the resulting 16 categories as being a representative and comprehensive field of essential categories of human personalities.
45 words. These 45 words, as assembled above and voted upon by politicians is “destroying our country”.
Yet, you can’t figure out how to fix it. That’s interesting. I mean, it’s 45 words. That’s not a lot, even an INTP could manage to read 45 words and form an opinion on them, yes? You believe these words are destroying our country but can’t even suggest what part of this single sentence is the bad part.
10 of the 45 words are about redress of grievances. Is that the bad part?
.) I just want us all to FIRST grok what the real problems are; THEN we can seek solutions. … If it’s not too late.