Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

pab_guy t1_itvk10m wrote

TLDR:

Some people mistake contrarianism for critical thinking. Aaron Rogers is one of them.

1,139

mick_ward t1_itvo3pl wrote

And he's not humble.

454

wooyeah-awwyeah t1_itwvvd4 wrote

"How I Overcame Arrogance And Became The Most Humble Man Alive: The Aaron Rodgers Story"

474

randeylahey t1_itxcvtl wrote

By Aaron Rodgers. Featuring Aaron Rodgers.

156

chickennoobiesoup t1_itxfeyv wrote

Foreword by Aaron Rodgers. On the dust jacket: “Best thing I’ve ever read.” —Aaron Rodgers

127

randeylahey t1_itxfkft wrote

Brought to you by the Aaron Rodgers Institute of Aaron Rodgers

58

rich8n t1_itxn2oa wrote

With a grant provided by the Aaron Rogers Objectivism Association

45

JoeyRobot t1_ity3c0i wrote

Dedicated to a very special person in Aaron Rodgers’ life, Aaron “Aaron Rodgers” Rodgers

33

who519 t1_itvusa4 wrote

I have so many of these people in my family. They automatically judge consensus as group think and as such judge all alternatives to consensus as truth. It is infuriating.

221

Kyocus t1_itxqziy wrote

Sounds like current conservative contrarianism.

19

Alphamoonman t1_itx6trd wrote

So your family comes to the consensus that alternatives to consensus are truth....

4

runningmn9 t1_itw9qgb wrote

Seriously. I don’t know whether Aaron Rodgers is a critical thinker, but I do know that all of the times he’s tried to project himself as a critical thinker, he’s just advocating for easily disproven nonsense.

People that are really smart / experts in one field, can sometimes assume that it makes them experts in other fields. He intuitively knows that I can’t read some google results and then process a live football play as well as he can, but he doesn’t seem to understand that reading a few web pages on topics that he has no education or experience with does not make him an expert on those things.

76

Hotrodkungfury t1_itxldao wrote

Lmao, and we all know that experts are NEVER wrong!

−67

runningmn9 t1_itxlk5i wrote

Experts are right infinitely more often than non-experts.

44

Hotrodkungfury t1_ity09iv wrote

Sycophants and zealots are wrong more often than not too…

−60

beingsubmitted t1_itybpjz wrote

That's a completely different statement.

In your first statement, you compared experts to omniscience. Your argument can be interpreted as "experts are not always correct, therefore we shouldn't value their opinion"

The rebuttal was that instead of comparing experts to omniscience, the more appropriate comparison is to the alternative: non-experts. Neither is always correct, but those are the options, and the experts are preferable.

You then mischaracterize this, "experts are correct more often than non-experts" as "experts are correct more often than they are incorrect". That's an entirely different statement. It is not the statement being made in the comment you're replying to.

Was that on purpose, or a mistake?

56

yiannistheman t1_itvzv3r wrote

Any kind of critical analysis or philosophical deconstruction goes immediately out the window where dishonesty and disingenuousness is involved. And Aaron Rodgers is as dishonest and disingenuous as they come.

72

pab_guy t1_itw0lqp wrote

I dunno, seems hard to know, but I'm not exactly following the guy around listening to everything he says.

I've been playing "Stupid, or Asshole?" for a very long time now and my conclusion is that it's usually both LOL.

35

fjccommish t1_itworhx wrote

Specific to what?

2

pab_guy t1_itxb4wy wrote

Mostly politics I guess... is that politician or pundit lying because he believes what he's saying? Or are they just an asshole?

10

Willing_Rub_9356 t1_itw37xn wrote

I find it hilarious. It exceeds simple contradictory, and becomes stupidity. Unproductive, misleading and deleterious to a mind not previously exposed to discussion/thought that has inherent value and purpose.

Being exposed to the semblance of “intelligent thought” to the average individual will lead them to believe it blindly. That logic is intensified in severity with media exposure.

6

[deleted] t1_itw8mon wrote

What’s philosophical deconstruction? Like Derrida ‘deconstruction’?

1

fjccommish t1_itxzffg wrote

Dishonest about what?

1

Ryans4427 t1_ity1j20 wrote

Intentionally letting everyone think he had been vaccinated and thereby breaking league rules for unvaccinated players.

11

AaronRodgersToe t1_ity2tdd wrote

He deserves major shit for lying to the media. But he was completely honest with the team, management and the NFL. If you’re mad at anyone about him breaking protocol (rightfully so) it should be the NFL and the packers organization who allowed him to do so knowing he was unvaxed. Which to be fair, anyone with a brain knew “immunized” didn’t mean vaxxed. Lol

−10

Seattle2017 t1_ity6ij2 wrote

No, we should be unhappy with him. He knew his public comments were extremely misleading.

9

AaronRodgersToe t1_ity8dr9 wrote

I literally said he deserves major shit for lying to the media. Why did you choose to ignore that?

−8

Seattle2017 t1_itydqfo wrote

I interpreted the rest of your comments as excusing his behavior, regardless of saying he deserved major shit for lying.

10

AaronRodgersToe t1_ityeuw0 wrote

I should have used paragraphs.

The first part about lying to the media was my opinion on his statements. I do think that people deserve to be upset that he lied when asked about his status.

The second part of my comment was addressing the person who I was replying to. I was telling them that I feel like the league and team deserve shit for him breaking protocols, because they knowingly allowed it to happen. His status was no secret and they allowed it to pass when they should have punished him like they claimed would happen.

0

Trucktub t1_itxn4oc wrote

It was awesome to see him on the Rogan podcast literally tell Rogan he had to make up a lie about getting vaccinated and then in the same sentence turned it around like he was a victim because people were calling him a liar lol.

The dude is brain dead

62

goodcleanchristianfu t1_itxj8an wrote

I think it's more like "Some people mistakenly think that declining to defer to other people's opinions is invariably a good thing." It's not valorizing coming to contrarian opinions, but rather failing to recognize that coming to opinions without deference to people who know more than you carries a high risk of being incorrect.

30

Kooshdoctor t1_itwh1l7 wrote

I really liked the idea of "critical" vs. "individual" thinking. Definitely made me examine it from a different angle. And I think it's true people are using it as a shield to avoid criticism because they want to be different. I'm not sure Joe Rogan has ever done much "thinking," let alone the "critical" variety.

7

natty_herbdoctor t1_itxrfnm wrote

So perfectly stated. A phenomenon I have witnessed over and over again but have lacked the words to describe it. Thank you 🙏🏼

3