youre speaking in generalizations. why is that? is there something specifically you can point to that supports what youre saying? If steinbart was anonymous, would you then consider his information for evaluating? Why do you refuse to evaluate it? Is it because you dislike the messenger? Would you ignore good, pertinent information just because you dont like the source? does that make sense?
my emotions play no role in my consumption and analysis of information. Vacuum it all up, use discernment to find my truth. Truth resonates deeply within. Q should have taught you that. We dont need gatekeepers or arbiters of truth. Free thinking is about learning the truth on your own. Refusing to look into steinbart is counterproductive to learning the truth.
youre speaking in generalizations. why is that? is there something specifically you can point to that supports what youre saying? If steinbart was anonymous, would you then consider his information for evaluating? Why do you refuse to evaluate it? Is it because you dislike the messenger? Would you ignore good, pertinent information just because you dont like the source? does that make sense?
my emotions play no role in my consumption and analysis of information. Vacuum it all up, use discernment to find my truth. Truth resonates deeply within. Q should have taught you that. We dont need gatekeepers or arbiters of truth. Free thinking is about learning the truth on your own. Refusing to look into steinbart is counterproductive to learning the truth.