The role of Devil’s Advocate is an interesting position to occupy. While once considered an absolute necessity to ensuring the integrity of the process of advancing claims to canon, subjecting even popular claims to genuine, arduous examination and scrutiny, it has not only fallen out of favor, particularly by those desiring to expedite the advancement of their proposals to canon or those with an interest to maintain them as such, but in some cases, anyone attempting to assume that role can expect to be vilified, reviled and dismissed.
Interestingly enough to explore further, the vilification of that role and the healthy discussion it serves to provide becomes most evident when the role is assumed against:
1. Certain dearly held claims that people have come to emotionally identify with or rely upon for a satisfying sense of completion. These claims may be the most fiercely guarded and protected from any scrutiny.
2. Extremely popular claims, frequently considered “settled” once a focused promotional campaign sways the majority to adoption. The common (but illogical) assumption must be that if it wasn’t true, most people wouldn’t believe it, making it safe to adopt and unnecessary to research, scrutinize or defend further.
3. Of course, any proclaimed canon, no matter how incredible or incomplete its claims, despite a lack of supporting evidence, that is more comforting than the uncertainty of its absence or the looming knowledge that it was promoted and advanced so rigorously, adopted so eagerly, to avoid even considering the much more likely and natural explanations still available.
I chose to take on the trifecta, the official canon of 9/11:
https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...423008-15-years-deception;-9-11-reviewed.html
I was better equipped to do so than anyone else on INGO and I obviously enjoy that sort of thing.
I took on the claims of a miraculous sequence of unprecedented and unexplained systemic failures affording a handful of amateur enemy hijackers an unimaginable level of unstoppable successes in executing what can only be considered an absolutely ridiculous plan to unimaginable, unprecedented and unexplainably catastrophic ends
…by suggesting that it was much more likely just easily explained tricks of the trade, that the evidence would certainly point to most of those and that is most likely why so much of it was destroyed, avoided or hidden.
Easy.
Interestingly enough to explore further, the vilification of that role and the healthy discussion it serves to provide becomes most evident when the role is assumed against:
1. Certain dearly held claims that people have come to emotionally identify with or rely upon for a satisfying sense of completion. These claims may be the most fiercely guarded and protected from any scrutiny.
2. Extremely popular claims, frequently considered “settled” once a focused promotional campaign sways the majority to adoption. The common (but illogical) assumption must be that if it wasn’t true, most people wouldn’t believe it, making it safe to adopt and unnecessary to research, scrutinize or defend further.
3. Of course, any proclaimed canon, no matter how incredible or incomplete its claims, despite a lack of supporting evidence, that is more comforting than the uncertainty of its absence or the looming knowledge that it was promoted and advanced so rigorously, adopted so eagerly, to avoid even considering the much more likely and natural explanations still available.
I chose to take on the trifecta, the official canon of 9/11:
https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...423008-15-years-deception;-9-11-reviewed.html
I was better equipped to do so than anyone else on INGO and I obviously enjoy that sort of thing.
I took on the claims of a miraculous sequence of unprecedented and unexplained systemic failures affording a handful of amateur enemy hijackers an unimaginable level of unstoppable successes in executing what can only be considered an absolutely ridiculous plan to unimaginable, unprecedented and unexplainably catastrophic ends
…by suggesting that it was much more likely just easily explained tricks of the trade, that the evidence would certainly point to most of those and that is most likely why so much of it was destroyed, avoided or hidden.
Easy.
