• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Hypothetical - Criminal Investigation

Read the OP


  • Total voters
    11

obvious Child

Equal Opportunity Hater
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
19,883
Reaction score
5,120
Location
0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
Hypothetically, a crime happens. There are 10 different potential criminals.

Which choice do you make:

A) Investigate the suspects to determine who did the crime

OR

B) Pick the criminal you think did it, do absolutely no investigative work and throw that suspect in jail

Take your pick.
 

Jucon

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 9, 2010
Messages
787
Reaction score
222
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
What is the point of this thread?
 

Jucon

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 9, 2010
Messages
787
Reaction score
222
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
I'm examining the inherently illogical beliefs that some people here hold.
Well I, for one, am in favor of the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
 

MKULTRABOY

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 5, 2009
Messages
10,621
Reaction score
2,104
Location
In your dreams...
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
I'm examining the inherently illogical beliefs that some people here hold.
How can you investigate when the question only conceptually allows for any half rational person to take the first choice? :shrug:
 
Last edited:

CaptainCourtesy

I'm a Jedi Master, Yo
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2006
Messages
156,723
Reaction score
53,491
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Let's wait for the punch line. I hope it comes soon.
 

The Mark

Sporadic insanity normal.
Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
26,010
Reaction score
6,498
Location
Pennsylvania
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
It is obvious (pun intended) to me that there was no point in making this question into a poll.

The poll is obviously designed and worded to prevent all but the most oblivious from choosing anything except option A, thus invalidating it as even a unscientific poll, IMO.

Please get to the point, as your actual point is obviously not contained in the poll questions.
 

obvious Child

Equal Opportunity Hater
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
19,883
Reaction score
5,120
Location
0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
No problem.

Replace Crime with "increased tax revenue and economic activity." Now replace the suspected criminals with a huge number of economic events.

Do you assume which one you want to have caused the increased activity to be true, or do you apply staistical methods and models to determine which caused it?

If you are Apdst, Zimmer or Conservative, you go with the first idea. You assume what you want to be true and do no actual work, the same thing as choosing which suspect you think did it and never do any investigative work.

Is that logical? Absolutely not. We don't assume which suspect we want to be guilty is guilty, so why do some people assume which factor they want to be true is true?
 

MKULTRABOY

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 5, 2009
Messages
10,621
Reaction score
2,104
Location
In your dreams...
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
Why are you banging your head against a wall for them?
 

The Mark

Sporadic insanity normal.
Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
26,010
Reaction score
6,498
Location
Pennsylvania
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
No problem.

Replace Crime with "increased tax revenue and economic activity." Now replace the suspected criminals with a huge number of economic events.

Do you assume which one you want to have caused the increased activity to be true, or do you apply staistical methods and models to determine which caused it?

If you are Apdst, Zimmer or Conservative, you go with the first idea. You assume what you want to be true and do no actual work, the same thing as choosing which suspect you think did it and never do any investigative work.

Is that logical? Absolutely not. We don't assume which suspect we want to be guilty is guilty, so why do some people assume which factor they want to be true is true?
If that's your question, why the hell did you ask a completely different one?
 

Mell

Well-known member
Joined
May 11, 2010
Messages
1,008
Reaction score
145
Location
Germany
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Hypothetically, a crime happens. There are 10 different potential criminals.

Take your pick.
A. But, why is there a poll about this. Surely, everybody would pick A.
 

The Mark

Sporadic insanity normal.
Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
26,010
Reaction score
6,498
Location
Pennsylvania
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
A. But, why is there a poll about this. Surely, everybody would pick A.
Read the thread.

The question he really wanted to ask wasn't even in the poll.
 

obvious Child

Equal Opportunity Hater
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
19,883
Reaction score
5,120
Location
0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
If that's your question, why the hell did you ask a completely different one?
Simple. I was able to replace key parts of the question with completely out of the blue subjects but retained the exact same principle thinking behind them. The obvious choice for this poll is to investigate. Except the same logic doesn't hold for some people when it comes to functionally the same thinking on another topic. It is a logical inconsistency to treat functionally the same thinking process differently on two subjects that have the same underlying logic.

We obviously investigate who did it. But some people here on some topics just pick what factor they want to be true rather then actually figure out if it caused the outcome. Here crime and say, economic activity are the outcomes. The suspects are the same as various economic events. Why would we treat our thinking behind them any differently? But some people here do and treat those who actually want to investigate with utter contempt. Now the real question is why do they flip their thinking when the underlying logic is identical?
 
Last edited:

The Mark

Sporadic insanity normal.
Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
26,010
Reaction score
6,498
Location
Pennsylvania
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Simple. I was able to replace key parts of the question with completely out of the blue subjects but retained the exact same principle thinking behind them. The obvious choice for this poll is to investigate. Except the same logic doesn't hold for some people when it comes to functionally the same thinking on another topic. It is a logical inconsistency to treat functionally the same thinking process differently on two subjects that have the same underlying logic.

We obviously investigate who did it. But some people here on some topics just pick what factor they want to be true rather than actually figure out if it caused the outcome. Here crime and say, economic activity are the outcomes. The suspects are the same as various economic events. Why would we treat our thinking behind them any differently? But some people here do and treat those who actually want to investigate with utter contempt. Now the real question is why do they flip their thinking when the underlying logic is identical?
An entirely valid point, but...

You could simply have laid out the comparison in your OP, asked the poll question more directly, and achieved much the same result - but without confusing people, or making them wonder why you were taking such a roundabout route.
 

obvious Child

Equal Opportunity Hater
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 8, 2008
Messages
19,883
Reaction score
5,120
Location
0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
An entirely valid point, but...

You could simply have laid out the comparison in your OP, asked the poll question more directly, and achieved much the same result - but without confusing people, or making them wonder why you were taking such a roundabout route.
Not really. Well, maybe now. The people I generally try to catch know that something's fishy. I sometimes try to ge them to vote first before springing the trap to show how they are logically inconsistent. But they usually just run away. So you do have a good point.
 
Top Bottom