OK. On topic of anti-intellectualism.
I have noticed lately, that there is a consensus on both sides of the political divide, that there seem to be a HUGE problem with people refusing to reason. Anti-intellectualism seems to be the name of this trend.
Well, the problem isn't exactly with the people refusing to learn, as much as with people adopting completely different view on what tools of learning seems to be valid.
People on the left do believe in institutional construct of academic science. They LOVE posting names of old dudes who agreed with their current belief, as well as pointing to a definition, that was changed 1 week ago. When we raise to them the fact, that all of these institutions are bending the knee in fear of their wrath, I am not exactly surprised, that they see that as dishonest unprovable hypothesis. (So, no matter what scientific paper I bring, you will just say, that people making it were afraid to disagree with the mob? Ain't that convinient)
On the other hand, the right does LOVE to use the common logical shortcuts. Rules like "No medication can be called 100% safe and effective by definition" are not written in any science jurnal, but their application does lead to an ability to form a solid world view long before information can go through a peer review, and are also completely free of any need for an authority to confirm them. Yet, when we come to a leftie with a 6 step logical chain, they look at us as loonies, since not a single one of these steps is formalized in an academic style. (Do you have a paper, saying that castrating kids will lead to a worse luck in finding a life partner????)
So, that means, that maybe, the time for constructive debate might be completely over. We no longer live in the same world, and no way of communication can bridge these two worlds.
Rightoids don't bring scientific papers. I don't remember seeing any here, that despite contending a few times over whether race is a concept that exists.
Strawman, nobody thinks trans people have an easier time finding partners.
@latein
> Rightoids don't bring scientific papers. I don't remember seeing any here, that despite contending a few times over whether race is a concept that exists.
So, tell me. Were you too lazy to read my post, or did your head reach so deep up your ass, that you couldn't smell the premise correctly?
The premise that rightoids bring scientific papers that get rejected for frivolous reasons is bullshit.
@latein
I wrote, that the right does not care for some jew approved paperwork. So, thanks for confirming, that it was the 2nd option.
Where's this "but they're just as anti-intellectual as us!" coming from? The source of the problem is obvious, hence why I went from chud to socialist.
Any concrete examples?
Also sounds like projection, this kind of stuff is daily here https://youtube.com/watch?v=ewXqB7g7t1A&t=3495
@latein @Witch_Hunter_Siegfired
Guess what the next step will be, after you prode an example... 
>>> Yet, when we come to a leftie with a 6 step logical chain, they look at us as loonies, since not a single one of these steps is formalized in an academic style.
On the contrary, I've never seen a chud say something in which both the premise and the logical inference were both valid.
For example -
1) Homosexuality is defined to be attraction to males be they child or adult
2) Pedophiles rape boys at a higher level than men in the general population are gay
3) Therefore pedophiles are more likely to be gay
But usually the fallacious bigot will skip over 1) and assume that, when in fact it is not a given that the men in 2) are attracted to adult men.