The Fight against Reason

The surge of post-truth political argumentation suggests that we are living in a special historical period when it comes to the balance between emotion and reasoning. To explore if this is indeed the case, we analyze language in millions of books covering the period from 1850 to 2019 represented in Google nGram data (nGram being search engine that charts word frequencies from a large corpus of books and thereby allows for the examination of cultural change as it is reflected in books). We show that the use of words associated with rationality, such as “determine” and “conclusion,” rose systematically after 1850, while words related to human experience such as “feel” and “believe” declined. This pattern reversed over the past decades, paralleled by a shift from a collectivistic to an individualistic focus as reflected, among other things, by the ratio of singular to plural pronouns such as “I”/”we” and “he”/”they.” Interpreting this synchronous sea change in book language remains challenging. However, as we show, the nature of this reversal occurs in fiction as well as nonfiction. Moreover, the pattern of change in the ratio between sentiment and rationality flag words since 1850 also occurs in New York Times articles, suggesting that it is not an artifact of the book corpora we analyzed. Finally, we show that word trends in books parallel trends in corresponding Google search terms, supporting the idea that changes in book language do in part reflect changes in interest. All in all, our results suggest that over the past decades, there has been a marked shift in public interest from the collective to the individual, and from rationality toward emotion.

“The post-truth era has taken many by surprise. Here, we use massive language analysis to demonstrate that the rise of fact-free argumentation may perhaps be understood as part of a deeper change. After the year 1850, the use of sentiment-laden words in Google Books declined systematically, while the use of words associated with fact-based argumentation rose steadily. This pattern reversed in the 1980s, and this change accelerated around 2007, when across languages, the frequency of fact-related words dropped while emotion-laden language surged, a trend paralleled by a shift from collectivistic to individualistic language.” … 1XYPHwC4Gk

to carry on what you have kindly started, the key point lies
within the very nature of conservativism…

what does it mean to be a conservative?

if we follow up on our ILP resident conservatives, one can see that to be
a conservative is to deny science, logic, rationality, medicine, reason…
to be an conservative is to deny reason and rationality in favor of
emotions and irrationality and illogical thought and behavior…

the conservative is convinced that by emotions, they are always right…
so, an example is the last presidential election… there are no facts supporting
them in thinking that IQ45 won the last election…but they feel it in their “gut”
and thus are convinced they are right… despite the facts that say otherwise…
they are convinced that IQ45 can walk on water despite the fact he was the
most corrupt president in American history, and that includes Nixon…but there
are no facts that will convince them otherwise… if you hold to something being true
despite all the evidence that says otherwise, that is a faith base religion…
if I hold to a point, regardless of all the evidence that show us otherwise,
then I am engaged in a religion…no different than those who hold to
a god being god despite there being no evidence of any kind to that effect…
god is god because I believe it so… so says the conservative…thus the conservative
holds to a faith base religion, in that there are no facts or evidence that will
change a conservative mind from the belief that there is a god or that IQ45 won
the last election…when presented with facts/evidence disproving their beliefs,
what does the conservative do? they will call it fake news, or create false
conspiracy theories to deny that evidence/facts…the attack on reason
and rationality lies in the fact that the conservative holds to their beliefs
no matter what facts or evidence might be presented otherwise…

the conservative believes that their beliefs are more important then
actual facts and evidence… the conservative beliefs are central to the core
of who they are… I believe that if UR or Observe or gLOOM ever allowed
themselves to incorporate facts and evidence into their belief system,
they would have a nervous breakdown… their belief system is tied into
who they are…

now take me for example, I have had three different and distinct political
stances…when new evidence/facts came in and changed what I thought
about a certain political belief, I didn’t have a nervous breakdown,
I simply change my beliefs to match the new facts and evidence…
the conservative cannot do that… how they think about themselves is directly
tied up into their beliefs…I can admit when I am wrong in my beliefs,
the conservative cannot… because of the way their beliefs are tied into
their own self worth…my self worth isn’t tied into my beliefs… thus I
can change my own beliefs without causing a stroke or a nervous breakdown…
unlike UR or Observe or gLOOM… have any of them ever admitted to being
wrong, about anything? nope, and you won’t ever see them admitting them
to be wrong because of how their beliefs are tied into their own image
or their self worth…the fight against reason is tied up with their
self image because to hold to reason or rationality, means one
might be wrong… but to hold to irrational beliefs, means one
never has to say their sorry… has any of the three I have mentioned,
ever admit to the fact that Biden actually won the election?
no, and why? because they can’t admit it without violating their own
self image…because I hold to reason and rationality, I can admit
that the village idiot won the 2016 election… and I didn’t cause
myself a nervous breakdown… can one of those three I wrote about
do the same about the 2020 election? I doubt it…

the conservative fight against reason comes from the very essence of
who they are… to admit to reason or logic or rationality would mean
that they may, maybe have to admit they might be wrong…

and heaven forbid that anyone actually admits to being wrong?
certainly not a conservative…


“Conservative” does not apply. We are not talking about “conservatives” here, we’re talking about Conservatives who became radicalized and have thrown away a crux of traditional conservative values in the process. But yes, indeed they are in a fight against who they “were” I would say, not are. There isn’t much about America they seem to like, there isn’t much about the country they seem to like, and there are many critical essences of the country and its foundation is something they have shown hatred for. Schools. Colleges. Hospitals. Doctors. The entire field of science in America. The FBI and Police (Capitol police) when it suits their needs to break laws. Our laws. Our order. Our media. Our democracy. Our peace. Anyone who isn’t them… Well over half of our country’s individuals.

Those things to be replaced with? Nothing… really. Of course, they can replace the media with weird propaganda stations that they are attempting, but that will be unsustainable, since a free market will always produce the truth they refuse… Unless they attempt to shut down the media and end freedom of the press, they have no solution. They can replace our Doctors with weird freaks who believe in Demon semen and pretending hydroxychloroquine is a solution, while their R&D department in pharmaceuticals work to find out how to inject bleach in our veins without killing us. They can replace our schools with Christian bible studies, in which God is the answer for everything, effectively ending or stifling scientific and as such technological progress. They can replace the FBI they don’t like and Police they don’t like with their brown shirts and Gestapos that exist of ignorant militia men from hillbilly country. I suppose that will work for them.

They Conservatives are people like Liz Cheney, Mitt Romney, John McCain, George Bush, Adam Kinzinger… People in the past I have or would vote for.

You know, how the Republican party was before a majority of them got TDS when Trump came around and ushered in the psycho fascists such as MTG, Boebert, Josh Hawley, Roger Stone, the My Pillow Guy, Peter Navarro, Corey Lewandowski, Steve Bannon. Then there’s those who smarmed their way from Conservativism to TDS like Lindsey Graham, Ted Cruz

The Fight against far-left loony toon domestic terrorists:


Let’s not forget emotionalism on the left.
Burning, looting, mob violence, cancelling, doxing, safe spaces, trigger warnings, struggle sessions, Trump Derangement Syndrome, hyperbole, hysterics, likening Jan 6 (a mostly peaceful protest, nothing like Antifa stormtroopers setting businesses, courthouses and police stations ablaze, taking over neighborhoods like CHAZ/CHOP, all brought to you by the democratic party) to Pearl harbor and 9/11, you know, bullshit propaganda like that, conspiracy theories like Russiagate, etcetera.

Yea for 7 months we watched Antifa and BLM battalions conduct the organized raiding and burning of America’s cities, 2 billion dollars worth of property damage, dozens of dead and thousands injured, I’ll never forget that, all during a pLandemic when nearly everyone else was social distancing, all with the blessing of the democratic party and most of the MSM, what an absolute fucking joke covid, democrats and neocon war criminal pieces of shit like the Bushs and Cheneys are, I hope they all rot in hell.
Let me tell you that woke millions of normies up to how authoritarian and racist the shitlibs on the left and their neocon counterparts on the right are.

What goes around, comes around.
Jan 6 is what came around.
Keep pushing your authoritarian, crony capitalist, open borders, warmongering, antiwhite, covid and tranny bullshit, there’s more to come.

I mean WW3 is like the most emotional guy here, and he made a thread about the rise of emotionalism.
You needn’t look very far, look in the mirror, it’s in your screenname and avatar.

“Post-Truth” = believe any lie I want to because I’m an adult-baby, WAHHHH WAHHHH WAHHHH! GIMME MY BAH BAH!

What a load of bullshit I’ve ever heard in my life… pathetic.

Fucking disgusting how hundreds of poor Americans are being held as political prisoners for walking around inside the capitol building or committing misdemeanors.


And may all his neocon and shitlib buddies be executed with him.

I am given to understand that 60% of Republicans still think that the presidential election was stolen from Trump illegally.
This is based on nothing except rumour.
No evidence has been presented. No evidence exists.
People accept it simply because they prefer to believe it.

This is an assault of reason and it is not going to play out well.

Leave it to Sculptor and ww3, the local ILP retards, to “fight against reason”.

I understand your rationale, focus on what you’re good at. If I were retarded, I’d probably be in your same boat.