Skip to main content

Very Easy to Say, "I'm Sure!" and Be Wrong, Am I Right?

 

I guess that foolish old man did the right thing to block me on social media. The old man remained incorrigible while having his toga display, apparently getting a doctorate. An earlier post I wrote was about the misuse and abuse of CTTO. I even wonder who in the world is Merkado CTTO? It's very easy to use CTTO to look smart. However, real studies need more than CTTO but several sources. It should be several valid sources and not just sources you agree with. I was laughing at this old man in a toga (who has thankfully blocked me after I tried to refute his errors as a nobody) who tends to use CTTO. I think he was also fond of saying, "I'm sure!" and then it ends up with several stupid claims.

Such people would be in what might be best called the MARITES Pyramid of Learning (read here). These people's best sources can be summarized as "Trust me bro" or "Just trust me". In the case of the meme I made, the peak of the pyramid is, "Just trust me or (insert insult)." Those who use insults hoping to win the argument aren't worth getting angry over. The big truth is that, according to the Positive Writer, using insults to win an argument is just plain stupid. Sure, I can get irritated. There's the chance I'll blow up. However, just because I got irritated or lost my cool doesn't change the facts. Though I'm told to keep cool because such people are plain incompetent.

It would be very easy to say one is sure of their claims. However, when challenged, it's very easy to go to the MARITES Pyramid of Learning. It's because insults make one feel good and feel like they've won. It could go as "I'm sure you're really stupid!" The person saying it might not even be aware of how many stupid claims he or she has made while saying, "I'm sure of it!" I can't really imagine how much error was made while the person kept saying, "I'm sure of it!" Or "I'm sure of it! If you don't believe me then you must be very stupid!" What a brilliant argument, right?" 

There are many instances of how "I'm sure!" is blended with the MARITES Pyramid of Learning. I could name some examples which can be very cringeworthy:

  1. Criminal investigations have been messed up because of this. First, we have the Vizconde Massacre (read here) and then we have the Chiong Sisters case (read my review on Give Up Tomorrow. Both cases were handled by judges who mishandled evidence by dismissing them. For example, retired judge Atty. Amelita G. Tolentino should've had the pieces of evidence examined before dismissing them. Didn't she say that the quality of evidence is more important than the amount of evidence?
  2. Gossip that the Chiong Sisters are still alive is another. It doesn't matter how much evidence is presented that Debbie Jane Chiong-Sia isn't Jacqueline and that Amelie R. Arquilliano-Chiong isn't Marijoy. Some people still continue to insist that they are. I guess not even taking them to the schools where the two studied will convince them. Maybe, they'll say the school fabricated the records--a serious case of slander that might land them in jail if they insist on it! I can imagine STC could file a case against such people as it can damage the school's reputation. 
  3. Some boomers still continue to insist that the Marcos Years were under a parliamentary form of government (read here). The evidence can be seen that there was a parliamentary without a parliament. The modifications still made the late Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr. a "president with powers". There's no president with powers in a real parliamentary system. Some even say it will make the Philippines worse even after being shown how parliamentary countries fare better. When confronted with evidence, they will still say, "I'm sure Marcos years were parliamentary!" with a series of poorly handed evidence.
  4. When people who go against FDI start to cite examples how it supposedly destroyed other countries. When asked for evidence, chances besides sources like IBON Foundation, they would start to use CTTO. If CTTO doesn't work, they start hurling insults such as, "Just admit it you're going to sell us to China, you moron!" 
  5. The same also goes for the late Flor Contemplacion (read here). Some people still salute the film The Flor Contemplacion Story as a masterpiece. They would say something like, "I'm sure Flor was innocent!" even after evidence was presented by forensics. The late Fidel V. Ramos later renewed ties with Singapore after he supposedly wanted to cut ties with it. I even heard Rodrigo R. Duterte later repent of his reckless act of burning the Singaporean flag in protest.
I'd like to conclude that it's very easy to say I'm sure. But one can be sure but be dead wrong. That's why I'd like to say, "Are you sure? Give me a valid source!" Because for all we know, the best source is from Trust Me Bro Factcheckers. 

Popular posts from this blog

BRUTAL Truth: Stop HOPING for Another "PNoy-Like President" Because the Parliamentary System will Produce MUCH BETTER Leaders

Let me get this straight, I'm not here to totally dismiss the good that the late Benigno Simeon "Ninoy" C. Aquino III did. I'll try to be least biased  when I'm writing this to "give a shock" to those who tend to treat his term as a "magical time". However, I'm going to have to warn people about the problem of looking for "another Messiah leader". Yesterday was the would've been 66th birthday of Noynoy if he were alive. One can talk good about Noynoy's legacy. However, we need to realize that relying on Noynoy's term is a violation of the Mahathir Mohamad principle of "Never stop learning."  We need to think that there's only one Noynoy and when he died, he died . TV-5 reveals that Rep. Edgar Erice, a long-time friend of the late leader, also said the following: Caloocan City 2nd District Rep. Edgar Erice made the remark in a social media post marking Aquino’s 66th birth anniversary.  In the post, he co...

The 1986 Snap Elections Would Also Disprove the Myth of the "Marcos Parliament"

Anti-charter change proponents love to use Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr. among their reasons, to defend their stand. The argument is that "charter change must be evil" because Marcos used it--a fallacy of Guilt by Association . Please, even Atty. Maria Leonor Gerona-Robredo's supporter  Andrew James Masigan  supports charter change! Now, we must look at Marcos and remember another significant event. It's the 1986 snap elections and why it's also proof that we never had a parliamentary form of government. February 7, 1986, was when Marcos declared snap elections. Two years before the snap election, Marcos even declared that the Philippines was never a parliamentary government under him : The adoption of certain aspects of a parliamentary system in the amended Constitution does not alter its essentially presidential character . Article VII on the Presidency starts with this provision:  ‘the President shall be the Head of State and Chief Executive of the Republic of the Ph...

Facts vs. Gossip: The "Chona Mae" Incident is Proof You NEED to Verify What You Hear

It was in 2012 when the Chona Mae incident happened. I remember the panic when people were running the opposite direction while I was working at Downtown, Cebu. The traffic was bad. People were panikcing. But the real twist? It was actually a father looking for his daughter, whose identity we may never know.  The Cebu Daily News   said this last 2022, which was before entering the post-COVID world: CEBU CITY, Philippines — It has been a decade since the famous “Chona Mae” line was uttered by a father looking for her daughter after a 6.9 magnitude earthquake struck the island of Cebu, February 6, 2012 .  From what was a simple call of a father to his daughter turned out to be the biggest tsunami scare in Cebu City.  “Ang tubig naa na sa Colon!” ("The Water is already in Colon!") was the line that has gotten everyone running on the street of Cebu looking for shelters up in the mountain parts of Cebu.  Today, we remember that frightful yet somehow funny day that w...

Learning About Chinese Dialects

As I look back on my college days, I recall learning more about Chinese history in a Chinese Language Class elective. Yes, it was going back to Grade 1 Chinese, but doing Grade 1 Chinese right. I looked at this video and thought of China's many dialects. A dialect is defined by the Oxford dictionary as, "a particular form of a language which is peculiar to a specific region or social group." The subject was taught in English, not requiring students to learn Hokkien first, and it was how the Chinese school system should've been. Most Chinese Filipinos (like myself) are Hokkien speakers. Amoy is known as Xiamen today, a coastal city of the Fujian Province. I was shocked to learn there are many different types of Chinese, such as Cantonese (used in Hong Kong), and I wasn't shocked to learn that Hainan and Hakka are other dialects in China. Similar to Filipino, China has several languages too! In the Philippines, we have Tagalog, Cebuano, Kapampangan, Waray, and Hilig...

Why I Believe So Many Filipinos (Especially Boomers) Misunderstand (and Blindly Oppose) Charter Change

Okay, I'm no political analyst or historian. That doesn't mean I should just shut up and not share my opinion. I felt like I needed to publish this piece. This is where I want to examine another issue. I've noticed some people on Facebook are sharing the quotes of Atty. Hilario G. Davide Jr. Some would try to do Ad Hominem attacks on me because I'm no constitutionalist (which I admit that I'm not). Just because I'm not a constitutionalist, doesn't mean, that I can't quote from the experts . Do I really need a degree in law at one of those prestigious universities in the Philippines? Sadly, some people are supposedly smarter than me but are the ones spreading nonsense.  Understanding charter change We need to see the definition first to understand why so many Filipinos, especially boomers , are so against it. The Philippine Star   gives this definition of charter change: Charter change, simply, is the process of introducing amendments or revisions to the ...