Talk:Pommer's Law

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

This is genius.-αmεσ (tinker) 01:15, 14 October 2007 (EDT)


I thought there was no such thing as a "wrong" opinion. 69.120.4.173 17:16, 9 May 2008 (EDT)

Yes there is. Ask Andy:-) --Bobbing up 08:30, 13 September 2008 (EDT)
This "law" shows that the perception of the "end-user" is always going to be different depending on WHOM the "end-user" is.
While there are no "wrong" opinions, (if, by that, one means an opinion that has been reached through data-derived research and can be supported with the rhetorical tools at one's disposal), it is ultimately the responsibility of the brain's owner to understand that somewhere, out on the internets, someone, someplace holds the exact and diametrically opposite view: One of the two is (obviously) "wrong". Since no-one can believe something that is obviously false the implication is clear, The other guy holds the wrong opinion.
This here, is (naturally enough) my opinion, hence it is wrong, somewhere.
Your question is merely confirmation of the Law in effect. CЯacke® 09:14, 13 September 2008 (EDT)

I disagree[edit]

I know someone who went from believing his white supremacist parents to actually coming to learn that people who are "different" are actually some of the best people ever. Kwsn 13:10, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

But this only proves the Law's validity...Your friend's ex-compatriots will now hold that he has the "wrong opinion", conversely he (probably) sees them holding their views in error. CЯacke®

Twaddle[edit]

This law has a few exceptions, of course. Some people may well find extra information on the internet that counteracts their prejudice and turn it into something more positive and based in reality. However, Pommer's Law is a commentary on the amount of shit out there and the number of people who will believe it at the drop of a hat, which is far, far higher figure.

On any question (under the sun) there will be those that argue X and those that see X as insane, holding rather to Y.
Whether one holds either one or the other isn't germane to the Law, only that someone else holds the exact and diametrically opposite view:clearly someone is WRONG.
Take (for example) the above ==I disagree== section head, the person who comes to the "enlightened" view merely agrees with those who also hold that view, those that hold oppositely will view the "enlightenment" as befuddlement.
Again as above...this is MY opinion, as such it is WRONG thus proving the Law.
11:51, 20 October 2009 (UTC) CЯacke®
Good point, I have added it in. Scarlet A.pnggnostic 18:38, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

There's already a name for it[edit]

It's called confirmation bias 24.215.166.162 (talk) 17:32, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

Really not the same thing as confirmation bias is a methodological flaw in your search and testing procedure, this is a silly quip about the internet. Scarlet A.pngtheist 09:07, 21 January 2013 (UTC)