30 Bananas a Day!

I'd appreciate it if you kept things simple. If you don't feel as though things can be proved then I personally don't wish to hear about it.  You can mention it of course. I don't really think somethings can be proved 100% either but I think you can give somone enough information on something that they are able to decide whether or not to believe in and follow the approach. I kind of like to use a similiar approach to Colin Campbell. I look at the big picture. I observe what people eat and what effect that has on them. Unless you want to try all these diets for yourself then you kind of have to trust in other peoples experiences to some extent once you have confirmed that they followed all diets the way they were supposed to. The paleo people for example have found a diet better than their previous and conclude that it's the best diet without having tried others. This is not logical of course. I'm sure some of them have tried various diets including 811. Whether they did it right or not is another matter.

 

It seems that too many people like to think about isolated studes too much such as the effect of vitamin c on a human cell or something. This is basically what Cordain seems to do in the debate between him and Campbell on protein. If you are able to look at all the possible factors that could be involved then you could do it this way but I personally see it as a bit of a waste of time.

 

I'm mostly talking about how do you prove a diet here or what causes what in terms of health but whatever.

 

There's probably similiar threads out there but there's no harm in having another eh? :) Prove me wrong ;)

Views: 325

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I do it.

Excellent answer :). But it only proves it to yourself but I suppose you could tell others to do the same. What about proving that something like the diet your following will work in the long term? This is not quite as simple as there aren't many people that have been on 811 for over 10 years. Or diets such as paleo for that matter. I think then you have to bring some kind of isolated science into the picture. Quote studies etc. Then it's just a matter of proving that your study has been conducted better than the persons that you are debating with providing they have one. That the study has overlooked something or whatever

The better educated one is, the easier it is to debate. Ultimately though, there is not enough scientific evidence to convince everyone, and nutritional science in particular is so young and incomplete that it can be compared to surgery in the 17th century. Sure, we can cut you up, but would you want to lie on the table? 

 

But generally the better educated you are, the easier it is to take down arguments. And the better your health, the more convincing your arguments (though simply the fact of being very healthy is no proof of any diet, particularly if you are young and active). I personally seldom debate to convince anyone though, I usually debate in order learn myself.

Yeah

 

I like to put across information to people that would probably never consider it otherwise though, and they can do what they like with it. I'm not telling people what to do or anything. But to deny it on an illogical basis and/or imply that I (and others)shouldn't believe in this thing is something that bothers me. Not to the extent that I'm getting angry about it or anything but I'd rather people not be that way myself.

 

I guess a lot of people don't want to believe things, open their minds up to new ideas or try things so it is next to impossible to debate.

 

Now how do I convince someone that I'm more educated than them hmmmm :D joke

You're more educated by knowing more, simple. Better arguments, knowing more, seeing their fallacies and having few yourself. (Everybody tends to have a few fallacies at least.) You shouldn't need to convince anyone of being more educated; if you are more educated, know more and argument better, it shouldn't take any convincing. It should be obvious. Of course, some people feel inferior when confronted with superior knowledge and will retort to all kinds of irrational arguments. Sometimes pounding helps (repeating the same arguments over and over, and they become convinced after 50 times or so), sometimes just laughing it off is a better approach.

 

I guess a lot of people don't want to believe things, open their minds up to new ideas or try things so it is next to impossible to debate.

 

I find that it helps to understand which OS their mind is running. Deep down, people want the same things, but the clothes they put on vary. That is, the ways in which they are trying to meet their needs are different, but the needs are roughly the same. Some people respond well to aggressive tactics, others are more likely to become engaged by a more contemplative and compassionate approach. There's no one size fits all. You probably have an approach which sits the most naturally with you, and I think that honing that approach is the best you can do rather than trying to learn an approach that feels alien to you.

Well I don't want to get into a debate here because I have bigger fish to fry ;). Not saying I'm right or anything. Just I think some of the things you've said are oversimplified. "better arguments", "knowing more". People will have different opinions as to what is a good argument unless you mean a better constructed one. A better constructed argument doesn't necessarily make it more true though than someone elses that could be perfectly true yet badly said. Of course if they're contradicting themselves then I suppose so. Knowing more. A doctor knows more than I do about the workings of the body, an anthropologist knows more than I do about anthropology, a biochemist in chemistry, all subjects that would make someone seem better educated in an argument on health but that doesn't make their argument any more true than mine necessarily. Knowing more about the relevant subject sure pretty much but what people do and don't see as relevant is something often up for debate and peoples opinons of whether or not that more information you have is actually right is another thing that people will question. Not so simple. If people aren't intelligent enough to realize when people are more intelligent then you do need to convince them. Not that I want to try.

 

Yes people respond to different approaches and I think I'm perfectly capable of adapting my approaches should I feel the need imo. Working out which OS they're using however is sometimes a task that will take some time and effort. So you would have already showed other approaches to some extent before figuring that out. That's not to say you can't change your approach but in some cases yes. Yes people want the same things near enough. I think some people have an OS that doesn't easily take to updates possibly because they don't see the need for them sadly.

A key aspect here is that yes, there are practically infinite ways in attempt to prove something right in accordance to scientific conclusion, BUT proving something wrong is definitely much simpler to do. WHICH, leads to a wonderful quote I have ran into a long time ago;

 

"Science is always wrong. It never solves a problem without creating ten more"  George Bernard Shaw.

 

That's the beauty of it.. That is what drives science to such a staggering development over the years; almost even exponentially in growth. Does that make sense?

Hehe pretty much. Especially science that looks at things under the microscope compared to big picture observing.

 

Yes it is a lot easier to prove something is wrong in most cases

Some people like to read studies.  Some just like to see flab turned into FAB!

 

I went out training last night with the gun triathlete squad in my state. We did 8x1k repeats. I smashed all but one guy and on the last repeat he beat me by 8 seconds. I was wearing my 'go vegan' singlet and all 30 of us were on a 1k section of road so I got to pass everyone all the time and 'prove it'. ;)

 

RSS

About

TheBananaGirl created this Ning Network.

30BaD Search

Latest Activity

Aysel is now friends with Houdini Steve Owens and Sugalena
Wednesday
OrganicMark posted a status
"Why the 2008 Housing Crisis Recovery Is Just an Illusion (w/ Keith Jurow) #evolution #awakening #peace #truth #light http://j.mp/2ODSZ93"
Tuesday
OrganicMark posted a status
"Not Transitory - Fed Liquidity Handout Surges To Near $90 Billion #evolution #awakening #peace #truth #love #light http://j.mp/35F4Sl5"
Tuesday
Frugisaurus and Alex Curtis-Slep are now friends
Monday
Michael Lanfield posted a video

Return to the Gentle Sea by Michael Lanfield with Music by Dr. Will Tuttle, PhD (Full Audiobook)

Return to the Gentle Sea: For the Love That Lives in Everyone is a book on spiritual healing and cultural transformation on the human relationship to nonhuman animals. It explains how living in a herding culture, eating animals and their secretions,…
Sunday
Michael Lanfield commented on ednshell's video
Sunday
Michael Lanfield and Olga are now friends
Sunday
Raw Aussie Athlete and Lil Green Coconut are now friends
Sunday
ednshell replied to Tams's discussion Best vegan retreats ?
Oct 13
ednshell posted a video

Take Back Your Power 2017 (Official) - smart meter documentary

This award-winning film documents the real story on smart meters. + Subscribe for free EMF guide & help stop 'smart' meters and 5G: https://TakeBackYourPower...
Oct 13
ednshell posted a discussion
Oct 13
Profile Iconmichael wilson, Savannah Holte, tori jacobs and 2 more joined 30 Bananas a Day!
Oct 13
OrganicMark posted a status
"QE4 "Not A QE" Begins: Fed Starts Buying $60BN In Bills Per Month Beginning Next Week #awakening #peace #truth #light http://j.mp/2M9cmoQ"
Oct 12
Rock and Tams are now friends
Oct 12
Tams posted a discussion
Oct 11
OrganicMark posted a status
"Powell says the Fed will start expanding its balance sheet ‘soon’ in response to funding issues #peace #truth #light http://j.mp/30Zc8ol"
Oct 11

© 2019   Created by TheBananaGirl.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service