“This means That.”

Categories

Traditional logical fallacies:

ad hominem attack,

Ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"[1]), short for argumentum ad hominem, is a logical fallacy in which an argument is rebutted by attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself.[2]

straw man,

A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while refuting an argument that was not advanced by that opponent. One who engages in this fallacy is said to be "attacking a straw man".

vague generality,

The fallacy of Vagueness occurs only when the appearance of soundness in an argument depends upon vagueness in its terms. The mere fact of vagueness is not sufficient to justify an accusation of fallacy, but it is sometimes a boobytrap which can cause the unsuspecting person to fall into fallacious reasoning. For this reason, it is useful to be aware of and on our guard against vague terms, so that we can continue to use our vague language without being ensnared by it.

circular reasoning,

Circular reasoning (Latin: circulus in probando, "circle in proving";[1] also known as circular logic) is a logical fallacy in which the reasoner begins with what they are trying to end with.[2] The components of a circular argument are often logically valid because if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true. Circular reasoning is not a formal logical fallacy but a pragmatic defect in an argument whereby the premises are just as much in need of proof or evidence as the conclusion, and as a consequence the argument fails to persuade. Other ways to express this are that there is no reason to accept the premises unless one already believes the conclusion, Backwards proof…

appeal to authority,

An argument from authority (Latin: argumentum ad verecundiam), also called an appeal to authority, is a common type of argument which can be fallacious, such as when an authority is cited on a topic outside their area of expertise or when the authority cited is not a true expert.[1]

“this means that.”

A way of, in one respect, assigning a symbol to a larger meaning, or semiotics. Semiotics (from Greek: σημειωτικός, "simiotikos") (also called semiotic studies; not to be confused with the Saussurean tradition called semiology which is a part of semiotics) is the study of meaning-making, the study of sign processes and meaningful communication.[1] This includes the study of signs and sign processes (semiosis), indication, designation, likeness, analogy, allegory, metonymy, metaphor, symbolism, signification, and communication.

Semiotics is closely related to the field of linguistics, which, for its part, studies the structure and meaning of language more specifically. The semiotic tradition explores the study of signs and symbols as a significant part of communications. As different from linguistics, however, semiotics also studies non-linguistic sign systems

From <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semiotics>


This occurs on many levels from global ideas condensed down to the type of person you are labeled as, to knowing the cross is for christians… sort of thing. However , they can be wrong like the swastika only meaning Nazi, when it is a symbol that has been current on the earth from time immemorial and it simply means vortex.

The construct of our reality and its confines is controlled in our language and its use to mold and scape the environment we live in by virtue of managing how we perceive the world around us and what values we assign to it with the language and semiotics we have been trained to utilize.

Reality and its mind cage is created by our language and how we talk about our lives, which, alters how we perceive our lives and how we feel about it, and thusly end up talking about it.

In other words: how we feel about our environment is colored by how we describe it to ourselves, and we use language - even in our own heads to do this. Language can then change not only how we feel on a daily basis, but it can color our reality - and language is moderated by societal norms, which are being manipulated in a myriad ways. And that is how we get to "This means That" as described by Jon Rappaport. The traditional logical fallacies as defined above are used against us to lead our thinking in all areas of life. This is also called programming. I've found it is almost impossible to out-think the whole mess. However, when I need to I can pick it a part and look at it. That's usually when I hit a brick wall in life that feels very uncomfortable. It is then that I realize that I have made a wrong assumption about myself due to the morass of information around me that is quite irrelevant, but made to seem as if it is important.

We need to, most importantly, employ these methods when looking at the fringe we all inhabit and all the written material, the videos, the podcasts, and realize that we are looking at an industry at this point. We are no longer as fringe as we think we are. The conventions, books, speakers, hotels, videos, alt news world, are all becoming monetized, meaning they too must produce. Here is where the nasty toads of dis-information, slow dribble information and flat out lies can proliferate along with all the how-to courses and the whole rest of it. It's kind of like the world that is created out of our favorite characters from our most beloved movies and all the associated action figures, trading cards, costumes, games, cons and all.

In a word: distraction.

Oh, but wait! There's more….

To make sure it's all the biggest jumbled mess you ever wanted to see, the real tells, or clues, or bits of information that might be correct come out in those fictional scenarios in the books and movies. And for just $29.99 you can own all of them…

You see where I am going with all of this. (I hope)

To wit, this is what it feels like to be in the middle of the world's biggest psy-op. Have fun in the game. Just remember, don't look behind that curtain.

I don't doubt that I have some logical fallacies in this article, however John Rappaport's article really started me thinking. Go read it here, see what you think. https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2017/03/04/anti-logic-education-plague/>

Recent Posts

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*