Dismissing an Article Because It was Written on Blogspot, WordPress, Etc.?

I guess one of the dumbest things I've run into on Facebook when I share my essays is, "Blogspot? WordPress? Is that a reliable source?" That's really a fallacy called Ad Hominem. That is choosing to attack me (the blogger) instead of the argument on Blogspot because I'm using a free domain.

I share my articles written in Blogger for this reason--I don't like writing overly long comments. It's sometimes better to link to my links rather than type them so long on social media. Writing articles on my business blog and this blog prepares me to write a lot. I can choose long essays and short ones. I may need 1,000+ (or more) words to explain a topic. Sometimes, I need only a few words (like this one) to stress a point. In short, I use my blog posts like ready-to-go ammunition.

Is my blog really suddenly, automatically fake news? FYI, I don't just write. I also do some Internet research. I even quote from some books like the late Lee Kuan Yew's book From Third World to First. I also read from news websites, academic websites (though I have to be careful about paid membership sites to avoid spending too much), and more.

I'd like to stress out that a person can get an impressive design, a yearly domain, etc., and still be giving out fake news mixed with the truth. Unfortunately, LKY even called the Philippines press to be rambunctious in his book From Third World to First when he said:

Ramos knew well the difficulties of trying to govern with strict American-style separation of powers. The senate had already defeated Mrs. Aquino's proposal to retain the American bases. The Philippines had a rambunctious press but it did not check corruption. Individual press reporters could be bought, as could many judges.

Would you really dismiss a valid argument on a free domain in exchange for a paid website full of rambunctious content? For all we know, the person using a free domain decided to go out there and get the information. The person may just be a hobby blogger so buying a domain might not be very practical. A blog is sometimes used to express ideals and share thoughts. Sure, it's not valid as an academic source. However, it can be used to automatically express views or to share thoughts without having to type ridiculously long comments.

Right now, I just write down my thoughts I don't intend to become some kind of expert. However, I do have my advocacy for constitutional reform in the Philippines. I'm also sharing my thoughts on shockers that I've encountered such as Francisco Juan G. Larrañaga's innocence or Hubert Jeffry Webb's innocence. I also want to share my thoughts on some random historical details. It's practicing my limited freedom of expression and freedom of the press.

Sadly, some people still feel so high and mighty that they look down on those they call "just another blogger" or "minor, minor blogger". A degree, an award, etc. might be good but it's not a license to belittle people who are ordinary netizens. Even worse, the name-calling and bullying might show how awards and degrees may not be the best credibility.

Nirvana Fallacy and the Die-Hard Defenders of the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines

IMGUR The philosopher Voltaire (real name François-Marie Aroue ) was said to have said, "Perfect is the enemy of good." To define the Nirvana fallacy, we can look at Logically Fallacious to help us define it: Description: Comparing a realistic solution with an idealized one , and discounting or even dismissing the realistic solution as a result of comparing to a “perfect world” or impossible standard, ignoring the fact that improvements are often good enough reason . Logical Form: X is what we have. Y is the perfect situation. Therefore, X is not good enough. Example #1: What’s the point of making drinking illegal under the age of 21? Kids still manage to get alcohol. Explanation: The goal in setting a minimum age for drinking is to deter underage drinking, not abolish it completely. Suggesting the law is fruitless based on its failure to abolish underage drinking completely, is fallacious. Example #2: What’s the point of living? We’re all going to die anyway. Ex...

The Foolishness of Complaining About Stupid Voters and Stupid Candidates, While Insisting the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines is "So Perfect"

I was looking into the Facebook page of Butthurt Philippines . Honestly, it's easy to complain but what's the use of complaining if you reject the solutions? The art produced by its administrator shows some problems. However, if the administrator here believes that the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines is "perfect as it is" (and he seems to be throwing a "saving face" by saying it was just sarcasm, and I failed to detect it) then it's really something. It's one thing to keep complaining. Complaining can be good. However, what's the use of complaining if you reject the solutions. Even worse, complaining about the quality of candidates for the upcoming 2025 midterm elections , while still saying, "It's not the system it's the people!" Please, that kind of thinking has been refuted even by basic psychology and political science! It's really good to point out the three problems. Distractions? Check. Keeping people hopeless? ...

A Parliamentary Philippines with Mandatory Weekly Questioning Will Be Better Than Its Mandatory Yearly Presidential SONAs

Rappler I must admit that ignorance of the difference between the parliamentary system vs. the presidential system is there. Some people still insist on the myth that the first Marcos Administration headed by President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr.'s late father, Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr., was really a parliamentary system. In reality. the Marcos "parliamentary" years during the Martial Law era, were still presidential (read why here ). A simple research would show that Cesar Virata was called by the late Lee Kuan Yew, as a non-starter and no leader. LKY would know how a real parliamentary system works. Sure, it's one thing that those who consider themselves Dilawan, voice their criticisms. However, the big problem of the Dilawans is their focus on political idolatry rather than solutions. I can talk with the Dilawans all they want that we do need to shift to the parliamentary system and some of them still cry foul, say that it'll be a repetition of the first Marcos Admi...

Don't Expect a Mahathir-Type Leader, Under the 1987 Constitution!

ABS CBN News Happy 100th birthday, Mahathir Mohamad! It's something that not so many people live up to 100, or more. The late Fidel V. Ramos passed away on July 31, 2022, at the age of 94. Ramos's advanced age may be the reason why the Omicron variant (which isn't supposedly fatal) ended his life. I'm posting this image of Ramos and Mahathir for one reason--Ramos wanted charter change back in the 1990s. However, plenty of anti-charter change commercials came in, the late Raul Roco said we only need a change in people, and we have Hilario G. Davide Jr. (who's in his late 80s but still active), and the idea that having a president who will rule for more than six years, is supposedly scary. Please, have they even thought that the late Pol Pot ruled Cambodia for just four years, but carried millions of deaths , that would make the late Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr.'s 20-year reign look tame (read here )? I've read posts on Facebook saying the Philippines just needs l...

Rare Interview Footage of Ninoy Aquino and Doy Laurel in Japan, Reveal Marcos Years Were NEVER a Legitimate Parliamentary System

People who are afraid of shifting to a parliamentary system tend to use the Marcos Years as proof. Fearmongers on Facebook are still up to their old tricks, using the Marcos Years to say, "No to cha-cha!" Never mind that a new constitution had to be written after 1986. If anything, Article XVII was inserted in the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines because it was never meant to be set in stone. Also, the 1973 Constitution of the Philippines was illegal . Here's a video of the late Benigno Simeon "Ninoy" A. Aquino Jr. and the late Salvador "Doy" Laurel. The words of Laurel here show the problem of Marcos' "parliament". Marcos' "parliament" lacked legitimacy . Where was the sporting chance of the Opposition? If it was a real parliamentary system, Ninoy would've been leading the Opposition in weekly debates against the Marcos-led government. That is if the late Ferdinand E. Marcos Sr. was the prime minister. If Cesar Vir...

A Business Graduate's Reviewing History Blog

Search This Blog