Comments Thread For: Frank Warren Defends Fury Following Gypsy King's Post-Fight Accusations Of Usyk Bias

[Winky-Wright]

Homer Simpson/Bambi on ice got ironed out by his little Ukrainian nightmare end of story, let’s move on.

[TheOneAboveAll]

TalkSport team really put it to Warren in that interview. Simon Jordan wasn't having any of the BS. Cobblers, Frank!

[daggum]

12-0 usyk because Ukraine

[TheOneAboveAll]

Without the knockdowns, it was a draw. With the knockdowns, it's a slight edge for Usyk, who also ended the fight in better condition. Over 15 rounds, he would probably still win a couple of them. Fury, after the 9th, was left without strength.

I just question why Fury didn't go the bully route. He never tried to seriously hurt Usyk. Against Wilder in their second fight, he went full body against him. Usyk is smaller, so why not try that for at least a couple of rounds?

People need to watch this fight back. In no sane world did Tyson Fury win 6 rounds of that fight.

[sirculturevulture]

Mental illness is fake. I’ve heard it all now in my lifetime.

You should probably learn about the brain, chemicals and behavior. We’ve learned quite a bit since that book came out, neuroscience has advanced 20-fold.

The evidence we have today makes his viewpoints unworthy of serious arguments. It would pretty much be on par with arguing with a flat-Earther.

At the time that he released that book, 1961, we didn’t understand the brain like we did now. For example, we couldn’t identify mental illnesses in autopsy’s. Now we can. Mental illness is now physically measureable in the brain. His book is based on science of the brain for its time. He was trying to explain why the science is how it is…in his own time. You can’t go around parading that book in 2024 with what we have discovered today.

Lots to unpack here:

• To say something is better because it's newer is an example of the appeal to novelty fallacy. It comes from the pervasive, mostly unconscious, and extremely vain, belief in progressivism, which is a feature of modernism that asserts that our culture -- art, philosophy, science, quality of life -- always improves over time.
• Invoking flat-earth ideas here is an example of association fallacy.
• When examining a brain during autopsy, how do you know that the neurotransmitter imbalance caused the depression? Can't you just as easily assert the opposite: the depression caused the neurotransmitter imbalance? And since you can't prove either one, your theory -- which I guess is that psychological issues are nothing but neurological issues -- is example of 'assuming the conclusion' fallacy. In other words, your evidence only proves your premise when you assume that your premise is true. It's an example of circular reasoning.
• I never said that "mental illness is fake." My point was that the disease model of psychology is a misinterpretation of reality. That which underlies what people call depression, anxiety, schizophrenia can be quite real. These are problems of the soul. They're not diseases and shouldn't be treated like diseases; nor should they ever be used as an excuse to escape personal responsibility, which, to bring us back to the article at hand, is exactly what Frank Warren is doing for Tyson Fury.

[P to the J]

I’d cut man some slack here he’s just done what a lot of sportspeople do after an event, esp boxers, and reacted emotionally. He’s kind of rowed it back since, not a big deal

[letsgochump]

Lots to unpack here:

• To say something is better because it's newer is an example of the appeal to novelty fallacy. It comes from the pervasive, mostly unconscious, and extremely vain, belief in progressivism, which is a feature of modernism that asserts that our culture -- art, philosophy, science, quality of life -- always improves over time.
• Invoking flat-earth ideas here is an example of association fallacy.
• When examining a brain during autopsy, how do you know that the neurotransmitter imbalance caused the depression? Can't you just as easily assert the opposite: the depression caused the neurotransmitter imbalance? And since you can't prove either one, your theory -- which I guess is that psychological issues are nothing but neurological issues -- is example of 'assuming the conclusion' fallacy. In other words, your evidence only proves your premise when you assume that your premise is true. It's an example of circular reasoning.
• I never said that "mental illness is fake." My point was that the disease model of psychology is a misinterpretation of reality. That which underlies what people call depression, anxiety, schizophrenia can be quite real. These are problems of the soul. They're not diseases and shouldn't be treated like diseases; nor should they ever be used as an excuse to escape personal responsibility, which, to bring us back to the article at hand, is exactly what Frank Warren is doing for Tyson Fury.

Saying our understanding of brain functions is better now than in the 60’s, 1800’s or 2500 b.c. is not an appeal to novelty. It’s a well documented reality.

For one you can get mental illness from head trauma. It wasn’t there before trauma and yet it’s there after. That’s a pretty simple explanation for any common sense person.

Interesting that you should deny mental illness being a disease that can be measured when you’re relying on a soul that you can’t even demonstrate it exists.

[sirculturevulture]

Saying our understanding of brain functions is better now than in the 60’s, 1800’s or 2500 b.c. is not an appeal to novelty. It’s a well documented reality.

For one you can get mental illness from head trauma. It wasn’t there before trauma and yet it’s there after. That’s a pretty simple explanation for any common sense person.

Interesting that you should deny mental illness being a disease that can be measured when you’re relying on a soul that you can’t even demonstrate it exists.

When you say something is true and you present no evidence for it whatsoever other than it was posited later than something else, as the original poster did, yes, that's a fallacy.

As for your head trauma example... The brain is a passive means of expression, like a musical instrument. If I gave a detuned violin to a world-class violinist, how would the poor quality of the music prove that the violin and the violinist are the same thing?

No, I can't prove the existence of a non-physical entity with physical evidence. All I can do is refute the evidence that something else is at work. Anyways, just because something can't be measured, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

[Smash]

MV5BZjA0NGU5YjItMjE0YS00OWI5LTg5M2QtYjBhYTFiZWJhNWNmXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMTkxNjUyNQ@@._V1_.jpg

im seeing tyson fury in the left guy for some reason