Never admit you're wrong!
Quote: teliotDonald Trump is the smartest man on the planet, by his own admission, and this is what he remembers:
Trump: “Hey, I watched when the World Trade Center came tumbling down. And I watched in Jersey City, New Jersey, where thousands and thousands of people were cheering as that building was coming down. Thousands of people were cheering.”
To many people, sufficiently large or small numbers cease to make sense because there is no cognitive basis for comparing the numbers to something experiential. All sufficiently large numbers become possible,because after some point they are just "large." But not all large numbers are made alike, and Alan's and aceofspades memories are false memories, just like Trump's.
I find myself blocking threads I would otherwise want to read because of innumerate bravado. It's a shame that a site like this has members who call scientifically minded rational people disparaging terms like "mathletes." There is no shame in such people leaving on their own terms.
It is a sad truth that many innocent citizens were wrongly convicted (or even executed) based on eyewitnesses testimonies ...
My impression from the numerous responses in this entire thread is that responders are skeptical of Alan's truthfulness in his claim. I don't think people question Alan's memory, but rather they question his credibility. Similar can be said about Trump's claim. No, it wasn't about Trump's false memory, but rather it is his complete fabrication of the story to MANIPULATE his supporters. There is a huge different between false memory and total lie or complete fabrication.
Quote: 777No, it wasn't about Trump's false memory, but rather it is his complete fabrication of the story to MANIPULATE his supporters. There is a huge different between false memory and total lie or complete fabrication.
I think Trump got confused between the West Bank and New Jersey somehow. Anybody can incorrectly remember something, but what bothers me is when anybody refuses to correct themselves when given overwhelming evidence the event in question very likely never happened. Alan had the same stubbornness over the two dice problem.
Quote: WizardI think Trump got confused between the West Bank and New Jersey somehow...
Yes. Jersey City is on the west bank of the Hudson. By the way, I was in Jersey City that day and I saw not one person cheering.
Were you on the Heights?Quote: ChesterDogYes. Jersey City is on the west bank of the Hudson. By the way, I was in Jersey City that day and I saw not one person cheering.
Quote: WizardI think Trump got confused between the West Bank and New Jersey somehow. Anybody can incorrectly remember something, but what bothers me is when anybody refuses to correct themselves when given overwhelming evidence the event in question very likely never happened. Alan had the same stubbornness over the two dice problem.
I think so too. But at a certain point, refusal to consider the fact that you are almost certainly wrong is worse than lying in some ways.
"I woke up last night, went to the park and found LeBron playing basketball. I challenged him to a game of 1 on 1 and won 11-0, then came home and went back to sleep."
"Maybe it was a dream."
"Impossible!"
The one thing you could say in Alan's defense, I guess, is that any particular state of affairs is extremely unlikely. (what are the odds of us all being conceived then yada yada yada up until this very second?) Some just stand out more.
I guess then you are talking about coincidence. Of all the extremely unlikely particular situations, what are the odds that you happened upon one that so closely conformed to a preconceived narrative, like winning back to back powerballs, or 18 yos.
As with Trump, we also have some extra factors. In Trump's case, the lack of recordings. In this case, nobody betting and no interference from supervisors, etc.
Quote: RigondeauxI think so too. But at a certain point, refusal to consider the fact that you are almost certainly wrong is worse than lying in some ways.
"I woke up last night, went to the park and found LeBron playing basketball. I challenged him to a game of 1 on 1 and won 11-0, then came home and went back to sleep."
"Maybe it was a dream."
"Impossible!"
The one thing you could say in Alan's defense, I guess, is that any particular state of affairs is extremely unlikely. (what are the odds of us all being conceived then yada yada yada up until this very second?) Some just stand out more.
I guess then you are talking about coincidence. Of all the extremely unlikely particular situations, what are the odds that you happened upon one that so closely conformed to a preconceived narrative, like winning back to back powerballs, or 18 yos.
As with Trump, we also have some extra factors. In Trump's case, the lack of recordings. In this case, nobody betting and no interference from supervisors, etc.
Depends, was it Lebron the homeless guy who washes windows, or LeBron James?
Quote: WizardI think Trump got confused between the West Bank and New Jersey somehow. Anybody can incorrectly remember something, but what bothers me is when anybody refuses to correct themselves when given overwhelming evidence the event in question very likely never happened. Alan had the same stubbornness over the two dice problem.
Hi Wizard, Scott Adams of Dilbert fame has a blog and he has been following Trump's surprising rise.
He answers your question in a recent blog:
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/137089875456/the-oddest-thing-about-trump
Quote: BasesLoadedHi Wizard, Scott Adams of Dilbert fame has a blog and he has been following Trump's surprising rise.
He answers your question in a recent blog:
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/137089875456/the-oddest-thing-about-trump
Scott’s thought is flawed on the fact that he based on Trump’s approval from a SINGLE GROUP that consist of primarily the radical, angry and disenfranchise voters (or perhaps extremists in many instances).
How easy is it to manipulate (or persuade if you want to use Scott’s terminology) this group of voters ? All one has to do is saying provocative & controversial things like kill all such and such, deported all such and such ... then the blood from these voters will come to a boiling point ...
It takes leadership skill negotiate and solve difficult issues such as budget, immigration, trade, military, etc… Saying things like build the wall, kill ‘em all is very easy and will surely get support/approval from his radical, angry and disenfranchise supporters, but it does not solve any problem.
It is one thing to manipulate your radical, angry and disenfranchise voters, but it is totally different to persuade or negotiate with your opposition/enemy in real world issues such as budget, entitlement, immigration, trade, military, etc…
Quote: BasesLoadedHi Wizard, Scott Adams of Dilbert fame has a blog and he has been following Trump's surprising rise.
He answers your question in a recent blog:
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/137089875456/the-oddest-thing-about-trump
Actually, the answer I have always wanted from Scott Adams was whether Wally is a pai gow poker player, or pai gow tiles.
If the hotlink fails to work, click here.
If I were to say that I believe that Trump knows he is wrong but won't say so for fear of looking weak, then I would be calling him a liar. That is a word I don't take lightly and won't use it unless I have rock solid proof. So, out of decency, I will take him at his word and call him delusional.
One thing I will give Mr. Trump due credit for is consistency. I've seen most episodes of The Apprentice and who you see on the news every day is exactly the same person on that show -- Always on the offense, never admitting fault, winning at all costs.
Quote: BasesLoadedHi Wizard, Scott Adams of Dilbert fame has a blog and he has been following Trump's surprising rise.
He answers your question in a recent blog:
http://blog.dilbert.com/post/137089875456/the-oddest-thing-about-trump
And one thing Scott failed to mention in his blog is the many of the people that Trump was able to "persuade" (I prefer "manipulate") also believe that President Obama is a Muslim, and was born in Africa. What does this say about Trump and Trump's angry voters?
Quote: WizardActually, the answer I have always wanted from Scott Adams was whether Wally is a pai gow poker player, or pai gow tiles.
If the hotlink fails to work, click here.
If I were to say that I believe that Trump knows he is wrong but won't say so for fear of looking weak, then I would be calling him a liar. That is a word I don't take lightly and won't use it unless I have rock solid proof. So, out of decency, I will take him at his word and call him delusional.
One thing I will give Mr. Trump due credit for is consistency. I've seen most episodes of The Apprentice and who you see on the news every day is exactly the same person on that show -- Always on the offense, never admitting fault, winning at all costs.
Apprentice is a game show where the contestants’ objective is basically to KISS TRUMP’s ASS and to please Trump at all cost. Criticizing and berating these contestants are not the same as persuading, dealing and negotiating with the real opponents and/or enemies.
Quote: 777Criticizing and berating these contestants are not the same as persuading, dealing and negotiating with the real opponents and/or enemies.
I was assuming Trump would insult and berate the president of Mexico until he wrote a check for the wall.
I pointed out Scott Adams blog because it seemed to be topical to the discussion.
As a craps player I never say nor write the number between 6 and 8.
But I'm not sure Scott Adams is right on an individual level. It might depend whom you are trying to persuade. Refusal to admit the possibility of error didn't go over well for either Alan or Trump among those who post here.
If you know even a little about how the human mind works, or probability, or if you are just an observant person with some experience in life, I think you simply mark down someone who refuses to admit being wrong as having very serious flaws in their thinking.
IRL, you might often concede to them because it's too tiring to argue with them and you don't want to deal with their histrionics about "calling them a liar" or whatever. But you won't actually be persuaded and will probably be less likely to believe them even when they are right.
Maybe it works better for politicians trying to persuade the general population, though.
Of course, in Trumps case, it's complicated by the fact that he was making a slanderous accusation likely to inflame hatred and perhaps even violence against real people. But, negotiation!
Quote: RigondeauxI recently read somewhere, can't remember where, that the more you hear a statement, the more likely you are to believe it is true. (Supporting Goebbels's POV on repeating lies).
But I'm not sure Scott Adams is right on an individual level. It might depend whom you are trying to persuade. Refusal to admit the possibility of error didn't go over well for either Alan or Trump among those who post here.
If you know even a little about how the human mind works, or probability, or if you are just an observant person with some experience in life, I think you simply mark down someone who refuses to admit being wrong as having very serious flaws in their thinking.
IRL, you might often concede to them because it's too tiring to argue with them and you don't want to deal with their histrionics about "calling them a liar" or whatever. But you won't actually be persuaded and will probably be less likely to believe them even when they are right.
Maybe it works better for politicians trying to persuade the general population, though.
Of course, in Trumps case, it's complicated by the fact that he was making a slanderous accusation likely to inflame hatred and perhaps even violence against real people. But, negotiation!
It is much much easier to tell angry people what they want to hear than to persuade them. In Trump case, it is not just about fabricating and repeating the lies, but it is also about manipulating the angry and disenfranchised populous by telling them what they want to hear.
Scott's flaw logic on Trump's power of persuasion revealed his lack of understanding of human psychology and political manipulation. We all have bias, when we hear things that are consistent with our belief or bias, then they reinforce our belief even further and effectively turn our bias into a "confirmation bias."
Person with good leadership and character should persuade and offer PRACTICAL solutions to his followers instead of telling his followers what they want to hear. Trump's rise in the popularity has NOTHING to do with his power of persuasion, but rather it is due do his willingness to tell his angry and disfranchise followers what they want to hear. And one effective way for Trump to gain support and popularity is to make his followers even angrier and more disfranchise by using inflammatory languages. Many of Trump's ideas are impractical and his inflammatory statements offer no practical solutions. Despite all these, his ideas and inflammatory statements are welcome because those are the things that the angry and disfranchise followers want to hear. Trump’s use of controversial and inflammatory statements/lies has effectively turns his followers' bias into a "confirmation bias" and consequently Trump becomes even more popular because their bias was confirmed by Trump's controversial and inflammatory statements/lies.
Quote: ukaserexI think this thread is missing something...have some of the posts been deleted/removed? Who's Alan? What was the original assertion?
I opened this thread thinking it was going to be advice about relating to women...
Quote: AyecarumbaI opened this thread thinking it was going to be advice about relating to women...
Oh, stop! lol....
Quote: ukaserexI think this thread is missing something...have some of the posts been deleted/removed? Who's Alan? What was the original assertion?
This is a split-off from the 18 yos in a row thread. Comparisons were made how Alan refused to recant his claim he witnessed 18 yos in a row, despite the odds of 1 in 39,346,408,075,296,500,000,000. Comparisons were made to Trump refusing to recant his story of thousands of Muslims in New Jersey cheering in the streets on 9-11. Then it totally flew off topic.
Quote: AyecarumbaI opened this thread thinking it was going to be advice about relating to women...
That would be a futile thread!
Under a different interpretation, millions of adults witness 18 yos in a row every year around early June. Here's a picture of 18 yos in a row:Quote: WizardComparisons were made how Alan refused to recant his claim he witnessed 18 yos in a row, despite the odds of 1 in 39,346,408,075,296,500,000,000.
*booo*
Quote: MathExtremistUnder a different interpretation, millions of adults witness 18 yos in a row every year around early June. Here's a picture of 18 yos in a row:
*booo*
I usually check redtube or pornhub OBVIOUSLY NSFW
is about. I read very few threads now.
'Yos' is the plural of 'yo' (roll of 11 in Craps). After some deliberation, Wiz determined 'yos' was the correct spelling in the "18 Yo's in a row" thread.Quote: EvenBobWhat is a yos, I have no idea what this
is about. I read very few threads now.
