Adams deliberately avoids commenting on Trump’s character. I’m unaware of Adams changing his estimate of Trump’s persuasion competence. Adams often gives evidence of why Trump is a master persuader.
Ok—so he neither makes falsifiable claims, nor updates publically.
That’s certainly something, but why is this rationality? Certainly not epistemic rationality.
If you want to make an argument for instrumental rationality, presumably we should look to self-made billionaires who were not obviously lucky, not cartoonists who are opportunistically shilling for a jackass without an obvious payoff in sight.
I just told you, he never remarks or updates publically on Trump’s character.
This means one of two things: (a) he’s on board with it, or (b) he’s not, but runs interference for it anyways.
It is not enough to support Trump unconditionally (which a lot of Trump supporters do *) to be a shill, you also need a megaphone. Supporting Trump unconditionally, but without a megaphone, merely makes one an idiot.
(*) Incidentally, I think something like 70% of polled Trump supporters said they think Trump should continue to lead even if we find out Russia helped get him elected.
The issue here isn’t that he’s a Trump supporter, the issue is he does not update on some aspects of Trump. Not updating + megaphone = the essence of shilldom, and the antithesis of rationality.
“You cannot say that to the press,” Trump said on the phone call. “The press is going to go with that and I cannot live with that. You cannot say that to the press because I cannot negotiate under those circumstances.”
-- Master Persuader in action, re: the wall with the President of Mexico.
Adams deliberately avoids commenting on Trump’s character. I’m unaware of Adams changing his estimate of Trump’s persuasion competence. Adams often gives evidence of why Trump is a master persuader.
Ok—so he neither makes falsifiable claims, nor updates publically.
That’s certainly something, but why is this rationality? Certainly not epistemic rationality.
If you want to make an argument for instrumental rationality, presumably we should look to self-made billionaires who were not obviously lucky, not cartoonists who are opportunistically shilling for a jackass without an obvious payoff in sight.
Adams makes lots of falsifiable claims, but not about Trump’s character.
Right—because he’s a shill. What’s the connection between shilling and rationality?
Rationality is supposed to bend in the winds of evidence. Shilling does not bend, shilling made its choice.
What is your evidence that he is a shill? Millions of Americans support Trump, are they all shills?
I just told you, he never remarks or updates publically on Trump’s character.
This means one of two things: (a) he’s on board with it, or (b) he’s not, but runs interference for it anyways.
It is not enough to support Trump unconditionally (which a lot of Trump supporters do *) to be a shill, you also need a megaphone. Supporting Trump unconditionally, but without a megaphone, merely makes one an idiot.
(*) Incidentally, I think something like 70% of polled Trump supporters said they think Trump should continue to lead even if we find out Russia helped get him elected.
The issue here isn’t that he’s a Trump supporter, the issue is he does not update on some aspects of Trump. Not updating + megaphone = the essence of shilldom, and the antithesis of rationality.
edit: In case still not clear, here is another shill: http://thememoryhole2.org/blog/scaramucci-tweets
Safe to ignore the commentary, just look at stuff he actually said.
edit: re: “no obvious payoff in sight for shilling”, he’s now gone. Food for thought for other shills.
Adams has stated why he doesn’t make claims about Trump’s character. Recent podcast.
He says his own moral views are such that if he went around shunning people for immorality, he’d be shunning everyone.
So, you came back to LW to argue politics?
The claim that Trump is a Master Persuader is falsifiable.
“You cannot say that to the press,” Trump said on the phone call. “The press is going to go with that and I cannot live with that. You cannot say that to the press because I cannot negotiate under those circumstances.”
-- Master Persuader in action, re: the wall with the President of Mexico.