Page 4 of 4 [ 59 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4


What's your opinion?
I didn't understand anything 15%  15%  [ 4 ]
It happens but it's rare 19%  19%  [ 5 ]
I prefer to think it's not true 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
What you describe doesn't exist 11%  11%  [ 3 ]
Duh! 15%  15%  [ 4 ]
Other _________________________________________________________ 41%  41%  [ 11 ]
Total votes : 27

Greentea
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Jun 2007
Age: 57
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,678
Location: Middle East

21 Jan 2010, 2:32 pm

Thanks a million, bhetti!


_________________
So-called white lies are like fake jewelry. Adorn yourself with them if you must, but expect to look cheap to a connoisseur.


Greentea
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Jun 2007
Age: 57
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,678
Location: Middle East

21 Jan 2010, 2:38 pm

Janissy wrote:
But they are outnumbered


Exactly, this is the claim I'm seeking sustaining evidence for! Anyone have any pointers?


_________________
So-called white lies are like fake jewelry. Adorn yourself with them if you must, but expect to look cheap to a connoisseur.


cosmiccat
Supporting Member
Supporting Member

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2007
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,835
Location: Philadelphia

21 Jan 2010, 2:38 pm

Ignore your dissenters, they don't have the capacity to understand the truth anyway; throw crumbs to your supporters, they will be the fodder on which to build your foundation and raise your indisputable truth higher. Yeah, I think I've got it now.



bhetti
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 May 2009
Age: 56
Gender: Female
Posts: 874

21 Jan 2010, 3:03 pm

Greentea wrote:
Thanks a million, bhetti!
you're welcome.



bhetti
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 May 2009
Age: 56
Gender: Female
Posts: 874

21 Jan 2010, 3:14 pm

Greentea wrote:
Janissy wrote:
But they are outnumbered


Exactly, this is the claim I'm seeking sustaining evidence for! Anyone have any pointers?
but what would you do with data comparing how many people are in soul-sucking cults. vs. everything else (not a member of anything, or member of supportive group)?

if you could gather data on all the various possible soul-sucking pyramids people could belong to, it'd still be useless. why?

the data could overlap and you have no way of knowing (i.e. someone could be in both a soul-sucking cult and a soul-sucking family. they might even have a soul-sucking job as well, but much less likely since the cult and family already sucked their soul out of them)

one person could have exchanged their soul for the same threats/promises that wouldn't move the person next to them. how can you tell one person has exchanged their soul for a promise of protection, and another hasn't? they might seem exactly the same, until one moves on because they're free and the other doesn't because they're trapped.

what about people who temporarily exchange their soul for protection then cancel their affiliation once they realize how much the loss of their soul affects them? what about people who only partially commit? they wouldn't be counted among those who've exchanged their souls, since by partially committing they've kept their options open.



visagrunt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,128
Location: Vancouver, BC

21 Jan 2010, 5:35 pm

One problem is that you are seeking to prove a negative, (i.e. that most people don't choose to join such, "pyramids.")

No amount of anecdotal evidence, short of a global census is going to prove that statement. Further, the fact that the statement is couched in loose language ("most people," is not a clear expression of magnitude) makes it ill-equipped to be subjected to logical rigour.

All we can prove with certainty is that exploitative, oppressive social groups exists; and that there are people who have not chosen to join such a group. I suspect proof of any greater pattern will prove elusive.


_________________
--James


Greentea
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Jun 2007
Age: 57
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,678
Location: Middle East

21 Jan 2010, 5:40 pm

bhetti wrote:
how can you tell one person has exchanged their soul for a promise of protection, and another hasn't?


That's indeed the most important question.

I gave a couple examples above and have many more I've observed in people throughout my life, but in general the signs I myself know to look for at this stage of my knowledge are 10. I've made a list, so anyone who wants to see it can PM me and I'll send it to them.


_________________
So-called white lies are like fake jewelry. Adorn yourself with them if you must, but expect to look cheap to a connoisseur.


Stinkypuppy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Oct 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,553

21 Jan 2010, 5:59 pm

cosmiccat wrote:
Ignore your dissenters, they don't have the capacity to understand the truth anyway; throw crumbs to your supporters, they will be the fodder on which to build your foundation and raise your indisputable truth higher. Yeah, I think I've got it now.

Indeed. Greentea, you can't keep ignoring your dissenters like this, or else you're pretty much cultivating a "soul-sucking" pyramid of your own.

And you are reading way too much into your friend's motivations for not going to Galilee with you. She has priorities, and doing family stuff is more important to her than going to Galilee. She can go to Galilee anytime other than Friday night. So it's totally incorrect to assume she would "never" go there or risk being ostracized from her family. Also, where is your proof that if she does not cook for them on any given Friday night, the family would be pissed? You are assuming that she is not doing it voluntarily at all.

Are you sure you're simply not just taking her turning your offer down a bit too personally?


_________________
Won't you help a poor little puppy?


Last edited by Stinkypuppy on 21 Jan 2010, 6:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Greentea
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Jun 2007
Age: 57
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,678
Location: Middle East

21 Jan 2010, 6:03 pm

visagrunt, yep, you're totally right. I should clarify to myself what I want to find out.

First of all, there's a qualitative difference between a cult pyramid and a pact pyramid. The former is about brainwashing (the victim is duped into believing it's good for her). The latter is a mutual agreement where there is no victim (a person decides, of their free will, to enter a pact of "You protect me - I do as you say". This thread is about the latter, definitely. So that's been cleared now.

Regarding whether almost all people choose to enter a pact pyramid.........it's indeed impossible to determine.

So I change my question to:

Have you met a big proportion of people who belong to a "pact pyramid"? If you say no, how sure are you that you would know if they were members of a pact pyramid?


_________________
So-called white lies are like fake jewelry. Adorn yourself with them if you must, but expect to look cheap to a connoisseur.


Ambivalence
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Nov 2008
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,643
Location: Peterlee (for Industry)

21 Jan 2010, 6:07 pm

Hah. "I saw this article and thought of you."


_________________
No one has gone missing or died.

The year is still young.


Greentea
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Jun 2007
Age: 57
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,678
Location: Middle East

21 Jan 2010, 6:12 pm

LOL Ambivalence, that article was hilarious!


_________________
So-called white lies are like fake jewelry. Adorn yourself with them if you must, but expect to look cheap to a connoisseur.


makuranososhi
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 May 2008
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,717
Location: Banned by Alex

21 Jan 2010, 7:36 pm

Stinkypuppy wrote:
cosmiccat wrote:
Ignore your dissenters, they don't have the capacity to understand the truth anyway; throw crumbs to your supporters, they will be the fodder on which to build your foundation and raise your indisputable truth higher. Yeah, I think I've got it now.

Indeed. Greentea, you can't keep ignoring your dissenters like this, or else you're pretty much cultivating a "soul-sucking" pyramid of your own.

And you are reading way too much into your friend's motivations for not going to Galilee with you. She has priorities, and doing family stuff is more important to her than going to Galilee. She can go to Galilee anytime other than Friday night. So it's totally incorrect to assume she would "never" go there or risk being ostracized from her family. Also, where is your proof that if she does not cook for them on any given Friday night, the family would be pissed? You are assuming that she is not doing it voluntarily at all.

Are you sure you're simply not just taking her turning your offer down a bit too personally?


That's alright, we can still discuss the arguments against. I think you make a solid statement, in that it is sheer assumption that all actions are based on a negative reinforcement structure as was originally offered. People make commitments - to groups, to individuals, to themselves. Questioning their behaviors because they do not conform to our expectations is the exact same treatment I received from others as a child that was so hurtful; I find it depressing that someone would choose to act in the same manner towards others. Just because any single one of us does not experience a sense of reward from an activity (in this case, family dinner) does not mean than any, or all, of the other may not find it extremely rewarding.

However, the question has been changed twice now, so it's a different conversation in some regards. This new question seems designed purely to get others to agree; those faced with it have the options of agreement, or immediately have themselves questions as to their ability or quality of perception. Seems like a loaded question to me, honestly.


M.


_________________
My thanks to all the wonderful members here; I will miss the opportunity to continue to learn and work with you.

For those who seek an alternative, it is coming.

So long, and thanks for all the fish!


Maggiedoll
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jun 2009
Age: 35
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,126
Location: Maryland

21 Jan 2010, 8:39 pm

Stinkypuppy wrote:
cosmiccat wrote:
Ignore your dissenters, they don't have the capacity to understand the truth anyway; throw crumbs to your supporters, they will be the fodder on which to build your foundation and raise your indisputable truth higher. Yeah, I think I've got it now.

Indeed. Greentea, you can't keep ignoring your dissenters like this, or else you're pretty much cultivating a "soul-sucking" pyramid of your own.

Obviously she can ignore anything she wants.. This is getting ridiculous. Not to mention that it's not an autism issue, it's a PPR argument, being conducted in a PPR style. Why is it in the General Autism Discussion section at all?



pandd
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Jul 2006
Age: 46
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,582

21 Jan 2010, 10:31 pm

Even if it were true that the overwhelming majority of humans belong to the kinds of social groups described, that does not prove that they chose to belong to such a group, that any pact of protection is necessarily entered into, nor that if someone chooses to join such a group and the kind of protection described is entailed in doing this, that said protection was relevent to the decision to join.

When are most people first admitted to a social group wherein they receive protection from complete independence, aloneless and 'figure-it-all-out-for-yourselfness"? Well for most people, the first such inclusion in a social group occurs when they are new-born infants. Is it remotely likely that new born infants have the knowledge and annalytical skills to make the kind of choice for the kinds of reasons described? I suggest not.

Do any other animals behave in a materially similar manner? Yes indeed. Is it remotely likely that they all have the necessary knowledge and annalytical skills to make the kind of choice described for the reasons described? I do not believe so.

Are humans some kind of magical exception, such that if non-human social animals seek out inclusion in a social group without necessarily entering into any reasoning or actually making a choice in any meaningful sense of the word, humans if they do materially the same thing, must be doing so for materially different, and significantly more convoluted reasons? Every other social animal participates in social groups because that is what social animals do, and not because they have personally calculated the benefits of doing so and made a particular choice based on such annalysis. Do I suspect humans are some magical exception to this, producing materially the same behavior for materially different reasons and by materially different processes? No, I cannot see any reason why I would believe such a far-fetched notion.