Talk:Fractal wrongness
Links to files like this one from George W. Bush are what make RW still live for me... I still lol... ħuman
01:57, 19 April 2009 (EDT)
[edit] Example
this article would be great with a short example of an argument with a fractally wrong person... I can't think of any off the top of my head though. any ideas? 194.6.79.200 11:12, 21 April 2009 (EDT)
- New World Order conspiracy theorists. These are the kind of morons who believe television is a brainwashing tool by a global state which is secretely the power behind every throne, Egyptians had hyper-advanced alien technology, all dogs go to heaven, etc. etc. --e|m|c [TALK] 12:08, 21 April 2009 (EDT)
- Young earth creationism is a pretty good example. Is it mentioned? ħuman
16:41, 21 April 2009 (EDT)
- Young earth creationism is a pretty good example. Is it mentioned? ħuman
- How about the 'Law of Attraction'/'The Secret' people? It seems once you have accepted the foundational axiom of The Secret - that your thoughts can control the universe - then the rest just spirals wrongly out of that error. No possible counterargument can convince them that they are in error. Thus pretty much everything that gets built upon this is wrong. That said, I think the only way to discover a fractally wrong person is by observational inference. If you have investigated, say, five or ten layers of their beliefs and found that each of those layers has led to a further layer of bullshit, you can then assume that it is bullshit all the way down until you see evidence to the contrary. –Tom Morris (talk) 22:20, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
'There is no cure for deliberate stupidity.' 82.44.143.26 (talk) 17:47, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
[edit] Expansion
Seems like this might be a good candidate for expansion. I see that it is right at the top of the entry point list for last month, and frankly it is a bit weak for an article that attracts a lot of people new to RW. Unfortunately there isn't a lot on the net about the concept - perhaps a large reason why we are the number one hit for the concept.
- The expression appears to have been likely coined ca 2001, from a (then) computer science student named Keunwoo Lee [1] [2]. Whether he used it first, or he borrowed it from someone else, he may well be deserving of a mention.
- I also note that a search for the concept always brings up this image rather than the one that we have so perhaps it should be replaced.
- I have been trying to read about fractals, and I can't say that I understand them, except to say that the colloquial meaning of a fractal is a picture that is visually similar regardless of the level of scale. That is rather a hazy definition, but one that comes close to capturing the meaning behind the metaphor.
--DamoHi 23:27, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
[edit] The list
I added a section listing different worldviews that are fractally wrong. Please do not use it to simply snark about worldviews you don't agree with. They must actually fit the definition. --User:Brendan Rizzo, 11 March 2015 21:45 UTC
- I'm not sure Oprah needs a unique entry as most of her views that qualify are already on the list.--SpecialFFrog (talk) 20:58, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
- It's also not appropriate since she only has a few things wrong with her; it's not like her mind is an abyss of logic where sanity goes to dieCorruptUser (talk) 21:02, 12 March 2015 (UTC)