Tuesday, June 26, 2007

What to look for in Michael Moore's upcoming "SiCKO"

1. Anecdotal Evidence in place of empirical research.

Scientific evidence is obtained through the scientific method: hypothesis, gather data, observe, draw conclusions. Anecdotal evidence is not based on facts or rigorous empirical study. Often, it is used to promote one's own agenda, particularly when the scientific evidence (and many other testimonials) supports the opposite claim. When anecdotal evidence is used in this way, it constitutes a logical fallacy.


2. Moore's inability to effectively use rhetoric.

MOORE: So you, Mr. Canadian, believe that all Canadian citizens should pay tax dollars to support each others' health?
CANADIAN: Yes.
MOORE: Are you a socialist?
CANADIAN: No, I'm a conservative.
MOORE, TO AUDIENCE: Ha! Bet you didn't see that coming! I'm so clever.

Smooth like *water.*


3. Michael Moore smugly pointing out many elected officials who have accepted money from health care lobbyists.

Though he'll fail to realize that it was the increasing government intervention in the private sector, exactly like what he's advocating now, that initially set the stage for the increasing corporate intervention in government that we see today.

You can't inject the government into the corporation without injecting the corporation into the government.
Digg This
Del.icio.us

6 comments:

Jettica said...

You asked about the colors.. well.. I think they are fantastic! Honestly, as long as you like them, they're great! Personally, I like them a lot! Nothing is blinding bright!

Jettica

Azzitizz said...

Colour is fine, content is interesting. All in all, a good blog. Keep it up, I will visit often.
:)

http://thetotallytransparentparty.blogspot.com

L.C. said...

I'm really curious to see this movie and I'm glad you posted on it. Your blog looks cool and I put a link to it on mine - hope that helps!



href="http://lynnfo.blogspot.com">Lyn

nC

Mojoey said...

Outstanding blog.

It's funny about economics. I took about a dozen classes in grad school. It blew my mind too.

breakerslion said...

Economics eh? Well I hope you keep your eyes open and don't believe everything they tell you. For example, you're likely to hear that Keynesian economics is dead. Yeah, right. Take a look at this pie chart, and ask yourself, "what does this tell me about how much money the government is injecting into the economy? Just because it goes to a select bunch, doesn't mean it does not influence the economy. Since a lot of people are happy about who is getting wealthy, and who gets to create wage slaves working for an agenda, the redistribution of spending advocated on that site is not likely to happen.

You might want to have a look at some alternative theories, like Upton Sinclair's if you have the time. If you look at a model from inside the framework of the model, it looks comprehensive and looks like it makes total sense. It's important to seek wider perspectives, if only to stimulate original/critical thinking.

Sapphire Eyes said...

Upton Sinclair was a socialist propagandist.

It's the Keynesian paradigm that's the problem. That doesn't mean that a couple things he said may be right, it was the way he viewed the entire system that was problematic. Thanks for the ideological rant, though.