"Why is it reasonable to believe in prisons, but not in the hell?"

[The Grand Nudger]

That's kind of the point. He's been to a prison too, so it makes little sense to argue against the existence of prisons, and that's on top of the specific arguments complete and utter lack of validity.

He may believe (and rationally argue) that prisons shouldn't exist, or that prisons should be reformed. That, for example, if some shithole country is throwing people in jail for mean tweets, they should cut that out. Alot of people would agree.

[FlatAssembler]

if some shithole country is throwing people in jail for mean tweets

So, you are calling Croatia, my homeland, a "shithole country"?

[The Grand Nudger]

Don't ask questions you don't want answers to.

Seems more like a question you should be answering yourself. We can take the assertions in your fallacious argument to be truly representative of how you feel about a matter even if they aren't representative of facts in mere reality.

It would be bad if x, therefore x doesn't exist/doesn't happen. You've employed this argument for massacres, and now prisons. You're the one who declared it a shithole, if we're being introspective about it, aren't you?

[FlatAssembler]

Don't ask questions you don't want answers to.  

Seems more like a question you should be answering yourself.  We can take the assertions in your fallacious argument to be truly representative of how you feel about a matter even if they aren't representative of facts in mere reality.  

It would be bad if x, therefore x doesn't exist/doesn't happen.  You've employed this argument for massacres, and now prisons.  You're the one who declared it a shithole, if we're being introspective about it, aren't you?

Well, you are claiming prisons exist everywhere, not just in Croatia, right? Besides, there are reports about people getting into jail for mean tweets everywhere, not just in Croatia. If anything, you are less likely to get into jail for what you say in Croatia than, for example, in Germany. Mate Kapović, probably the most prominent Croatian linguist, is openly denying Bleiburg, and faces no consequences for that. In Germany, if you deny the Holocaust, you allegedly get years in jail.

[The Grand Nudger]

The other foot falls, lol. If you want to argue against reality as anti-croatian propaganda and remind us that bad stuff happens elsewhere, too.. just lead with that.

What does any of the above have to do with -your- assertion...that it would be bad if x? What's the new argument, croatia is a shithole, but germany is worse? Sorry, doubt that. I was stationed there between deployments.

[FlatAssembler]

We don't throw people in jail for cheating on their spouses, but, no..simply having such a law would not make a system or ideology authoritarian.

Then what does authoritarian mean?

Most soldiers, on either side, imagine themselves to be the heroes of the story

Again, how can you rationally believe you will be a hero if you join an illegal army attacking a hospital?

If people feel that prisons are an adequate course of action with respect to some objective, then there will be prisons - this is what the principle of rationality states.

So, you think that Bryan Caplan in his "Myth of the Rational Voter" was, in fact, arguing against a straw-man?

---

A theist trying on scepticism for the first time.

Why would I have to be a theist?

Perhaps there's a reason they don't want visitors.

Isn't that an ad-hoc hypothesis?

[The Grand Nudger]

Then what does authoritarian mean?

-

Authoritarianism is a form of government characterized by the rejection of political plurality, the use of a strong central power to preserve the political status quo, and reductions in the rule of law, separation of powers, and democratic voting.

Again, how can you rationally believe you will be a hero if you join an illegal army attacking a hospital?

Were you aware that not all of our beliefs are rational, and that not all of the beliefs that appear irrational to others are irrational on their own grounds?  You should be.......

So, you think that Bryan Caplan in his "Myth of the Rational Voter" was, in fact, arguing against a straw-man?

That's an odd question as a follow up to the one before it.  I havent read it, but from the blurb..

The Myth of the Rational Voter: Why Democracies Choose Bad Policies is a 2007 book by the economist Bryan Caplan, in which the author challenges the idea that voters are reasonable people whom society can trust to make laws. Rather, Caplan contends that voters are irrational in the political sphere and have systematically  ideas concerning economics.

....I'd say that he's not arguing with a straw man in that particular, though for all I know the book is full of straw to try and sell his contention that we might not be rational voters and might not be very good at governing by popular vote.  Every time people vote against their own interests they provide anecdotal evidence for this claim..but often enough, a deeper exploration of their motivations will show that they were at least acting with respect to their interests how they saw them - and this is rational behavior.  We can be rational and wrong.  We can rationally do terrible things.

Rationality, getting it right, and doing good..are not interchangeable.....just as something being bad is not interchangeable with it's non-existence or falsehood.

[Belacqua]

if some shithole country is throwing people in jail for mean tweets

So, you are calling Croatia, my homeland, a "shithole country"?

There's no denying any more that the US is a shithole country. 

I don't know anything about Croatia.

[The Grand Nudger]

Nothing if not predictable, right Bel? Sure, though, by the standard that Flat offered, that it would be bad to do that, if croatia is throwing people in jail for mean tweets. Shithole. If the us is throwing people in jail for mean tweets. Shithole.

That follows, it would be bad - therefore my country, which is doing it..is bad. It would be bad, therefore my country isn't doing that...doesn't. Do you have any particular sympathy for the latter argument that you'd like to share? Tell us how bad and terrible it would be if so and so were really doing x or really believed x..therefore they obviously don't and aren't and anyone who thinks they do or are is mistaken..even if it's them?

[FlatAssembler]

Do you have any particular sympathy for the latter argument that you'd like to share?

Well, I do not know how trustworthy those reports about how bad the US is and how bad China is are. Is it reasonable to believe the Trump administration is having concentration camps where they put Hispanics? I think it is not, because the US government is denying that, and governments are, with all their flaws, the best source of information we have. Or whether the Tiananmen Square Massacre happened? Well, I think Tiananmen Square Massacre did not happen either. Chinese government is denying it, and that is probably the best source of information we have. I mean, what incentive do they have to lie when they are so powerful? As well, what happened to the bodies of those who supposedly died on the Tiananmen Square? Not to mention the ironic meanings in names. The name "Tiananmen" means "gate to heaven"... where the victims of the massacre were sent? Hmm...