Not a bad idea....now rip away sheep

[HawkInATX]

Hypocrisy may be closer, but it's not a stretch to use irony when viewing your post as a whole. "stating or acting the contrary of what is meant"...is a loose definition

In this case you stated that you automatically dismiss use of the word sheeple, as it's a term used to disingenuously affect one's audience and their perception of a following point or idea... then you used the very same technique by invoking the label conspiracy theorist, a term used to disingenuously discredit someone and their point or idea. Should we not then automatically dismiss your point under the same principle invoked?

Call it irony, hypocrisy or just plain a contradiction. It's there, and I'm not the only one who noticed.

Except that many conspiracy theorists use the term to describe themselves, as it is a description, not an epithet, while I doubt anybody embraces the term "sheeple." But if you want to get into a discussion of denotation vs. connotation then that's totally fine. I'll split hairs with the best of them. What you've failed to do, though, is to respond to the crux of the argument, which is that the OP absolutely meant to deride others by calling them sheeple, and did, in fact invoke the "money=power" conspiracy. Therefore OP is, in fact, a conspiracy theorist without any connotation, only denotation. But it's cool if the subtlety of the difference eludes you.

An example of irony would be if I were a conspiracy theorist myself and I called his particular group of conspiracy theorists sheeple.

Hypocrisy would be if I dismiss the term sheeple and then use the term derisively to describe another.

Neither of those things happened.

 

[pythagoras]

Considering most tickets are already paid for....

 

[hawkdrummer1]

Except that many conspiracy theorists use the term to describe themselves, as it is a description, not an epithet, while I doubt anybody embraces the term "sheeple." But if you want to get into a discussion of denotation vs. connotation then that's totally fine. I'll split hairs with the best of them. What you've failed to do, though, is to respond to the crux of the argument, which is that the OP absolutely meant to deride others by calling them sheeple, and did, in fact invoke the "money=power" conspiracy. Therefore OP is, in fact, a conspiracy theorist without any connotation, only denotation. But it's cool if the subtlety of the difference eludes you.

An example of irony would be if I were a conspiracy theorist myself and I called his particular group of conspiracy theorists sheeple.

Hypocrisy would be if I dismiss the term sheeple and then use the term derisively to describe another.

Neither of those things happened.

Money = Power is a conspiracy theory? Thousands of years of history would suggest it's pretty valid.

As for the sheeple term. I'm with you in that I prefer avoiding broad labels...especially when used to summarily dismiss someone's argument. (both "sheeple" and "conspiracy theorist" fit that mold IMHO). Trite as this may sound, name calling usually is the first sign you're losing the argument.

That having been said, there are far too many people that believe everything they see on "the news" is true and don't have the courage or critical thinking skills to question it. We're a Nation of consumers and way too many consume and follow what they're fed without thinking. One only need watch Facebook for a day to see it in action.

 

[HawkInATX]

Money = Power is a conspiracy theory? Thousands of years of history would suggest it's pretty valid.

As for the sheeple term. I'm with you in that I prefer avoiding broad labels...especially when used to summarily dismiss someone's argument. (both "sheeple" and "conspiracy theorist" fit that mold IMHO). Trite as this may sound, name calling usually is the first sign you're losing the argument.

That having been said, there are far too many people that believe everything they see on "the news" is true and don't have the courage or critical thinking skills to question it. We're a Nation of consumers and way too many consume and follow what they're fed without thinking. One only need watch Facebook for a day to see it in action.

With that I absolutely agree, way too many people consume a lonely piece of information without corroborating it or even thinking about it. It used to be fairly well confined to grocery store tabloids with "B-52 Bomber found on Moon" or "Lizard Baby born to Half-Ape Half-Human Bearded Lady", but anymore, if you make it sound remotely plausible and say it loud enough, people will believe it to be true.