Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

We need to bar certain people from voting

Like, I genuinely think we should have a questionnaire before each election for each citizen to see if they are mentally capable of understanding the difference between causation and correlation. If you are unable to connect opinions to verifiable fact, you should have no say in government

Edit: If you feel personally attacked by this, maybe it's time to reevaluate whether your own opinions are based in fact. I neither mentioned nor suggested that any party or political affiliation is guilty of incoherent ideas lol
Top | New | Old
meJess · F
So politicians will not be voting
KidAzazel · 26-30
@meJess A good chunk of them lmao I truly believe though that most politicians do know the difference between fact and speculation. They just like to base their politics on speculation because people are easier to control when they don't question their cognitive dissonance
JoePourMan · 61-69, M
Here is the problem with your idea.
Fact: Medical experts have determined that an unborn is a life.
Fact: Medical experts have determined that an unborn is not a life
Fact: Courts have ruled that an unborn is a life.
Fact: Courts have ruled that an unborn is not a life.
Who do you propose should be the arbiter of these competing facts? Who should be denied their constitutional right to vote, those who are pro-choice or those who are pro-life?
KidAzazel · 26-30
@helenS It doesn't take a professor to realize what is or isn't linked to real evidence lol Especially in the age of information
helenS · 36-40, F
@KidAzazel You said "mentally capable of understanding the difference between causation and correlation"
KidAzazel · 26-30
@helenS Exactly. Do you understand what the words "causation" and "correlation" mean? If not, allow me to clarify:

Causation: The act of causing something
Correlation: A mutual relation of two or more things


So, just because some things are related in a way, it doesn't mean one is caused by another. This is important because most conspiracy theorists, as an example, emphasize correlation, but correlation means nothing without causation. For example, if you were being tried for murder, and you were accused simply because you knew the victim better than anyone else (correlation), that would be unfair, right? But, if there were evidence that made clear the fact that you indeed murdered that person (causation), only then would it be appropriate to punish you by law
same with driving and reproducing. LOL
TexChik · F
And of course only libtards are qualified to vote? First we have to suspend the constitution , because the 15th amendment
TexChik · F
@helenS take a look at Venezuela ... a corrupt socialist paradise .
helenS · 36-40, F
@TexChik Come on, I wasn't serious. 🌷
TexChik · F
@helenS sorry ...😉
simple math, history and science questions... also any candidate has to be able to answer them.

actually instead of a debate have every candidate answer science and history questions publically on tv.
hell make it a multiple choice test so they cant go on wah wah wah.. but have to make a clear answer
KidAzazel · 26-30
@Strawberrry Especially science and history, for sure. If an issue requires knowledge of a certain field, it should be mandatory to be well-versed in those fields
GerOttman · 70-79, M
You ever read any of Robert A. Heinlein's work? He has a good take on this.
GerOttman · 70-79, M
@helenS It was not his best work, I read it too. My take was that it was written as a purely commercial novel. Try Stranger in a Strange Land, or my all time favorite. To Sail Beyond Sunset! That one really had me fascinated.
helenS · 36-40, F
@GerOttman Thank you for the recommendations! 🌷
The only other one that I have read is "Moon is a Harsh Mistress". I can't remember whether I liked it or not...
GerOttman · 70-79, M
@helenS Pretty sure I read that once, but I may have been like 16?? It was a while ago! I read a lot of the big four back then. Niven, Clarke, Asimov
Kwek00 · 41-45, M
Lets not do that... 🙄
Quetzalcoatlus · 46-50, M
If the politicians are representing the people of this country, the idiots must also be represented..
KidAzazel · 26-30
@Quetzalcoatlus All I'm saying is, you wouldn't ask a construction worker to prescribe you medicine, and you wouldn't ask an electrician to work on nuclear physics. Why should it be any different in terms of shaping policy and the way people live their lives?
Quetzalcoatlus · 46-50, M
@KidAzazel A government of the people includes the ones you don’t agree with. You want to improve the intellect of idiots then help expand access education
KidAzazel · 26-30
@Quetzalcoatlus It's not about disagreement though. People can have opinions based in fact and still disagree with one another. But we should not be endangering the progress of a nation by allowing those without a proper understanding of causation vs. correlation to dictate our laws and regulations. If you can't see why, we'll just have to agree to disagree

 
Post Comment