Points without a point

If you watch "Hacking Your Mind" on PBS, you will understand we usually react emotionally in our auto-piolet mind even though we think we are in our critical thinking mind. I call it points without a point. If your point does not suggest a action be taken or a change of interpretation be explored, or further questioning take place to lead to a solution, it has no real worthwhile point. Also, if your point is part of a no win ( No matter how someone answers you will say they are wrong, usually using 20/2o hindsight) position so you can affix blame, it serves no purpose if fixing the problem.

One such example is focusing on whether or not Trump was saying the The WHO was specifically saying he was right about lock-downs in this video: https://twitter.com/i/status/1314573157827858434

Quite frankly I do not believe his saying they agree he was right implies they specifically used his name or not. To make try and make it a point and say he was lying about them specifically using his name is a focus without a point. Let's instead discuss its content and its content.

Another point without a point is a front page newspaper article that focused on the fact that the drug Trump took as treatment for COVID used fetal tissue in its development. The fact Trump was pro-life somehow means he is a hypocrite. The question of if he knew fetal tissue was involved before he took it was never asked. I ask the following questions:

Question: If he knew before hand fetal tissue had been used in the development should he have refused it?

Yes ____

Grey area ___

No ___

Question: He now wants to make it available to the general public free of charge. Knowing it involved fetal tissue should he now prevent it from distribution even if it could save tens of thousands of lives?

Yes ____

Grey area ____

No ____

Question: Weather or not he was against its distribution or actively sought its distribution, Is there an answer where could he win with you?

Answer what that would be________

Another form of a no win is stating negative situations that the solution to one would make the other worse. An example is stating evidence that Trump mishandles the pandemic is that 20% of small businesses might never reopen and the number of deaths associated with the virus:

Question: If you feel he pushed to open up the economy too soon (despite the recent WHO Video) and keeping it closed longer would have saved lives, what would that have done to the 20% of small business suffering?

Text answer here ______

Whatever your position, looking at it from a damned if you do and damned if you don't does not get us closer to purple. As with most issues, answers lie within the grey.