And We Shall Call Him President Trump.
18 Nov 2016, 1:40 am
Shahunshah wrote:
Ganondox wrote:
Shahunshah wrote:
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Shahunshah wrote:
You talk about allowing certain opinions as if it is the same as allowing people to have a warped sense of reality. That isn't actually the case.
I think it's the case by definition. If your opinions are wrong, and if these opinions are connected to a world of other opinions(which they are) then to some extent your view on reality is being warped by these wrong opinions.
Now, if you have a single wrong outlook, like you somehow think that scientists proved that Mars was red due to copper rather than iron, it might not have much of an impact. However, most discussions aren't about the surface composition of Mars so much as much larger subject areas that weave across multiple disciplines. In those cases, being wrong is a bigger deal. It does mean warping your sense of how the rest of the world works. Also, because it is bigger, the intellectual sins required to be wrong are larger.
Quote:
Well the worst opinions in society such as hate speech we keep under the rug for a good reason and do not consider them acceptable. But simple political opinions even if they are ill informed are not bad themselves is in most cases they do not affect your attitude to people in general. E.g. you don't simply start hating blacks or Hispanics because your a Trump supporter so why should we bother to change that?
I see no reason to agree. Facts are by nature better than falsehoods. If you wear your opinions as a shiny vest, merely to look pretty, then you should really consider reducing your attachment to them. Maybe form opinions on soap operas instead. But what you believe is part of the expression of who you are as a person, just as generosity and conscientiousness play out in the social sphere. And while maybe casual intellectual sins don't mean much, it doesn't seem that far of a leap to imagine how tolerance for those is hard to really separate out from tolerance for conspiracy mongering.
Maybe you want to navel-gaze on the line between falsehood and conspiracy mongering, but the simplest explanation is just that all is the same, just that more falsehoods are worse than less.
Like you I feel as though their is a problem with ignorance but I think where our arguments are different is how to deal with it. I feel as though we don't necessarily need to chastise people and developing a more reliable media might be just as good. In my eyes the only opinions that should reject socially are opinions that go into hatred or intolerance the effects of that can be really punishing for society.
But I would say we shouldn't chastises someone's identity just because of misinformation. If someone identifies as a liberal/Conservative even if they have a slightly off world view that is a good thing. It allows people to feel a part of group and as though they have good morals. For instance I know a girl with borderline personality disorder, by her having opinions and sticking to them so passionately I think she has developed a real sense of pride in herself. And that is something I just don't feel we should be rejecting or trying to take away.
Sometimes there are thing more important than whether it makes them feel good, because they aren't going to feeling good in the long term if they continue to act in a certain manner according to certain beliefs.
Sometimes people can just as easily change their perspective overtime and it doesn't make people feel like crap in the process.
And what I said still applies.
_________________
Cinnamon and sugary
Softly Spoken lies
You never know just how you look
Through other people's eyes
Autism FAQs http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt186115.html
18 Nov 2016, 1:47 am
Ok, Shahunshah. A few different words:
1) Isn't your task ironic? If you've noticed, you're actually in the act of trying to persuade Ganondox and me that arguing with people is wrong. And there are only 2 ways this can go:
a) You provide something somewhat undermining to what we already believe, which is the very sin you're calling out against.
b) That you don't, in which case we have no reason to change our minds.
2) I'm not really sure how much sympathy anybody is warranted under the conditions you're granting.
a) People spouting off nonsense is actually deeply alienating to me, because I do care about these issues.
b) Holding an opinion, and spouting off on it are both personal choices where the risks are already known in advance.
c) Not trying to do a good job in a conversation and then being beaten, seems like a natural consequence. It's sort of like complaining that basketball has winners. The fact that basketball has winners is partly the appeal, but it's also potentially embarrassing if somebody is bad at basketball. Changing the entire world to a place where everybody gets a gold star though is, in my mind, deeply embarrassing for the human condition.
d) Feedback is a powerful driver to improve. In fact, sticks and carrots account for a lot of how people really do improve, and the only way a conversation has both(or even really either) is if we maintain the idea of better and worse ideas.
e) People can form less contentious ideas that ground them. Become a Buddhist. While some people will give a s**t, most won't.
3) Pursuit of the truth is a virtue.
a) While politics seems abstract, it has real world consequences, and so bad beliefs can lead to bad outcomes.
b) Even discussions on politics are ways of honing skills and habits that come into play outside of politics. So, if you learn how to argue and reason well in a political discussion, you can probably also retool those skills to work if trying to present a business case or talk through an idea with somebody else in your life.
c) Caring about the truth is one of those things that grounds people in reality. If one spouts off lines without researching them, then to me that's a sign that they don't really care about the world outside of their ego. Even if they don't have that problem, somebody DOES live that problem. As I already mentioned, I find these people deeply frustrating, and while using the term "gaslighting" might be a stretch, there is some emotional similarity.
d) Being disciplined to what reality is, and what claims can be justified is an important thing for being a balanced person, as it means that you learn not to speak carelessly or mistake your opinions for the experiences of other people.
e) The truth is a good thing, as truths are all else equal better than untruths.
Sorry if I switched the format from response to bullets, but... I don't really see your point. You ask for sympathy for people who are getting what they deserved in both senses of the word, in that they intentionally entered a situation where this is a known risk, and in that the risk they suffer is due to personal failings on their part that they should then rectify. Past that, I don't know what you would want to be said.
18 Nov 2016, 1:49 am
Ganondox wrote:
Shahunshah wrote:
Ganondox wrote:
Shahunshah wrote:
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Shahunshah wrote:
You talk about allowing certain opinions as if it is the same as allowing people to have a warped sense of reality. That isn't actually the case.
I think it's the case by definition. If your opinions are wrong, and if these opinions are connected to a world of other opinions(which they are) then to some extent your view on reality is being warped by these wrong opinions.
Now, if you have a single wrong outlook, like you somehow think that scientists proved that Mars was red due to copper rather than iron, it might not have much of an impact. However, most discussions aren't about the surface composition of Mars so much as much larger subject areas that weave across multiple disciplines. In those cases, being wrong is a bigger deal. It does mean warping your sense of how the rest of the world works. Also, because it is bigger, the intellectual sins required to be wrong are larger.
Quote:
Well the worst opinions in society such as hate speech we keep under the rug for a good reason and do not consider them acceptable. But simple political opinions even if they are ill informed are not bad themselves is in most cases they do not affect your attitude to people in general. E.g. you don't simply start hating blacks or Hispanics because your a Trump supporter so why should we bother to change that?
I see no reason to agree. Facts are by nature better than falsehoods. If you wear your opinions as a shiny vest, merely to look pretty, then you should really consider reducing your attachment to them. Maybe form opinions on soap operas instead. But what you believe is part of the expression of who you are as a person, just as generosity and conscientiousness play out in the social sphere. And while maybe casual intellectual sins don't mean much, it doesn't seem that far of a leap to imagine how tolerance for those is hard to really separate out from tolerance for conspiracy mongering.
Maybe you want to navel-gaze on the line between falsehood and conspiracy mongering, but the simplest explanation is just that all is the same, just that more falsehoods are worse than less.
Like you I feel as though their is a problem with ignorance but I think where our arguments are different is how to deal with it. I feel as though we don't necessarily need to chastise people and developing a more reliable media might be just as good. In my eyes the only opinions that should reject socially are opinions that go into hatred or intolerance the effects of that can be really punishing for society.
But I would say we shouldn't chastises someone's identity just because of misinformation. If someone identifies as a liberal/Conservative even if they have a slightly off world view that is a good thing. It allows people to feel a part of group and as though they have good morals. For instance I know a girl with borderline personality disorder, by her having opinions and sticking to them so passionately I think she has developed a real sense of pride in herself. And that is something I just don't feel we should be rejecting or trying to take away.
Sometimes there are thing more important than whether it makes them feel good, because they aren't going to feeling good in the long term if they continue to act in a certain manner according to certain beliefs.
Sometimes people can just as easily change their perspective overtime and it doesn't make people feel like crap in the process.
And what I said still applies.
Just asking out of curiosity.
18 Nov 2016, 2:09 am
For the majority of people politics isn't just the pursuit of truth it is tool that makes people feel good. The majority of people interested in politics never go into the feild but hold opinions on it as it makes themselves feel important and good. Maybe that is just something we should accept in people rather than trying to change how others think, and putting every political discussion into some ultimate serious quest for truth seems odd because in many ways it isn't, people simply like expressing their views. We don't have to quash others for it every time.
I will follow this later by a more extensive post.
18 Nov 2016, 2:50 am
Shahunshah wrote:
For the majority of people politics isn't just the pursuit of truth it is tool that makes people feel good. The majority of people interested in politics never go into the feild but hold opinions on it as it makes themselves feel important and good. Maybe that is just something we should accept in people rather than trying to change how others think, and putting every political discussion into some ultimate serious quest for truth seems odd because in many ways it isn't, people simply like expressing their views. We don't have to quash others for it every time.
I will follow this later by a more extensive post.
I will follow this later by a more extensive post.
Ok, but... if I am also motivated by the same feeling, wouldn't I by my nature quash them? I mean, I valued politics enough where I put a few years of my life into a policy relevant degree(Economics) so I may better discuss these issues.
18 Nov 2016, 5:13 am
Shahunshah wrote:
Ganondox wrote:
Shahunshah wrote:
Ganondox wrote:
Shahunshah wrote:
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Shahunshah wrote:
You talk about allowing certain opinions as if it is the same as allowing people to have a warped sense of reality. That isn't actually the case.
I think it's the case by definition. If your opinions are wrong, and if these opinions are connected to a world of other opinions(which they are) then to some extent your view on reality is being warped by these wrong opinions.
Now, if you have a single wrong outlook, like you somehow think that scientists proved that Mars was red due to copper rather than iron, it might not have much of an impact. However, most discussions aren't about the surface composition of Mars so much as much larger subject areas that weave across multiple disciplines. In those cases, being wrong is a bigger deal. It does mean warping your sense of how the rest of the world works. Also, because it is bigger, the intellectual sins required to be wrong are larger.
Quote:
Well the worst opinions in society such as hate speech we keep under the rug for a good reason and do not consider them acceptable. But simple political opinions even if they are ill informed are not bad themselves is in most cases they do not affect your attitude to people in general. E.g. you don't simply start hating blacks or Hispanics because your a Trump supporter so why should we bother to change that?
I see no reason to agree. Facts are by nature better than falsehoods. If you wear your opinions as a shiny vest, merely to look pretty, then you should really consider reducing your attachment to them. Maybe form opinions on soap operas instead. But what you believe is part of the expression of who you are as a person, just as generosity and conscientiousness play out in the social sphere. And while maybe casual intellectual sins don't mean much, it doesn't seem that far of a leap to imagine how tolerance for those is hard to really separate out from tolerance for conspiracy mongering.
Maybe you want to navel-gaze on the line between falsehood and conspiracy mongering, but the simplest explanation is just that all is the same, just that more falsehoods are worse than less.
Like you I feel as though their is a problem with ignorance but I think where our arguments are different is how to deal with it. I feel as though we don't necessarily need to chastise people and developing a more reliable media might be just as good. In my eyes the only opinions that should reject socially are opinions that go into hatred or intolerance the effects of that can be really punishing for society.
But I would say we shouldn't chastises someone's identity just because of misinformation. If someone identifies as a liberal/Conservative even if they have a slightly off world view that is a good thing. It allows people to feel a part of group and as though they have good morals. For instance I know a girl with borderline personality disorder, by her having opinions and sticking to them so passionately I think she has developed a real sense of pride in herself. And that is something I just don't feel we should be rejecting or trying to take away.
Sometimes there are thing more important than whether it makes them feel good, because they aren't going to feeling good in the long term if they continue to act in a certain manner according to certain beliefs.
Sometimes people can just as easily change their perspective overtime and it doesn't make people feel like crap in the process.
And what I said still applies.
Just asking out of curiosity.
I don't understand your question.
_________________
Cinnamon and sugary
Softly Spoken lies
You never know just how you look
Through other people's eyes
Autism FAQs http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt186115.html
18 Nov 2016, 5:16 am
Shahunshah wrote:
For the majority of people politics isn't just the pursuit of truth it is tool that makes people feel good. The majority of people interested in politics never go into the feild but hold opinions on it as it makes themselves feel important and good. Maybe that is just something we should accept in people rather than trying to change how others think, and putting every political discussion into some ultimate serious quest for truth seems odd because in many ways it isn't, people simply like expressing their views. We don't have to quash others for it every time.
I will follow this later by a more extensive post.
I will follow this later by a more extensive post.
But political opinions also create a lot of bad feelings because whenever you have strong political feelings you'd inevitably find someone else with strong political feelings in the opposite direction. So if the political opinion isn't for the sake of truth, what value does it have if it just leads to conflict?
_________________
Cinnamon and sugary
Softly Spoken lies
You never know just how you look
Through other people's eyes
Autism FAQs http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt186115.html
18 Nov 2016, 6:33 am
Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Shahunshah wrote:
For the majority of people politics isn't just the pursuit of truth it is tool that makes people feel good. The majority of people interested in politics never go into the feild but hold opinions on it as it makes themselves feel important and good. Maybe that is just something we should accept in people rather than trying to change how others think, and putting every political discussion into some ultimate serious quest for truth seems odd because in many ways it isn't, people simply like expressing their views. We don't have to quash others for it every time.
I will follow this later by a more extensive post.
I will follow this later by a more extensive post.
Ok, but... if I am also motivated by the same feeling, wouldn't I by my nature quash them? I mean, I valued politics enough where I put a few years of my life into a policy relevant degree(Economics) so I may better discuss these issues.
Well your degree is still good when it comes to discussion since I believe people would be more interested in what you have to say on issues rather than someone they perceive as ignorant. But why should we undermine someone is wrong, opinions allow people to feel important and intelligent if we undermine them we risk taking away that sense of security. And why should you be more entitled to political opinions. Why should you have a greater voice than "Joe" the welder who contributes to the country's industry and therefore society as a whole. Doesn't Joe have a right to speak on the society he works for and is a part of.
18 Nov 2016, 6:36 am
Ganondox wrote:
Shahunshah wrote:
For the majority of people politics isn't just the pursuit of truth it is tool that makes people feel good. The majority of people interested in politics never go into the feild but hold opinions on it as it makes themselves feel important and good. Maybe that is just something we should accept in people rather than trying to change how others think, and putting every political discussion into some ultimate serious quest for truth seems odd because in many ways it isn't, people simply like expressing their views. We don't have to quash others for it every time.
I will follow this later by a more extensive post.
I will follow this later by a more extensive post.
But political opinions also create a lot of bad feelings because whenever you have strong political feelings you'd inevitably find someone else with strong political feelings in the opposite direction. So if the political opinion isn't for the sake of truth, what value does it have if it just leads to conflict?
As for my previous post, the question was. Would you in your personal life be more confrontational when you see someone ignorant or would you leave them to their opinions?
18 Nov 2016, 3:36 pm
Shahunshah wrote:
Ganondox wrote:
Shahunshah wrote:
For the majority of people politics isn't just the pursuit of truth it is tool that makes people feel good. The majority of people interested in politics never go into the feild but hold opinions on it as it makes themselves feel important and good. Maybe that is just something we should accept in people rather than trying to change how others think, and putting every political discussion into some ultimate serious quest for truth seems odd because in many ways it isn't, people simply like expressing their views. We don't have to quash others for it every time.
I will follow this later by a more extensive post.
I will follow this later by a more extensive post.
But political opinions also create a lot of bad feelings because whenever you have strong political feelings you'd inevitably find someone else with strong political feelings in the opposite direction. So if the political opinion isn't for the sake of truth, what value does it have if it just leads to conflict?
As for my previous post, the question was. Would you in your personal life be more confrontational when you see someone ignorant or would you leave them to their opinions?
Except it doesn't, because the nature of the opinion is that it leads to conflict. Beliefs lead to action, they aren't just something separate from the world.
It depends on the situation, but in my personal life I'm a very unconfrontational person. That has more to do with anxiety though than belief.
_________________
Cinnamon and sugary
Softly Spoken lies
You never know just how you look
Through other people's eyes
Autism FAQs http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt186115.html
18 Nov 2016, 5:18 pm
Ganondox wrote:
Shahunshah wrote:
Ganondox wrote:
Shahunshah wrote:
For the majority of people politics isn't just the pursuit of truth it is tool that makes people feel good. The majority of people interested in politics never go into the feild but hold opinions on it as it makes themselves feel important and good. Maybe that is just something we should accept in people rather than trying to change how others think, and putting every political discussion into some ultimate serious quest for truth seems odd because in many ways it isn't, people simply like expressing their views. We don't have to quash others for it every time.
I will follow this later by a more extensive post.
I will follow this later by a more extensive post.
But political opinions also create a lot of bad feelings because whenever you have strong political feelings you'd inevitably find someone else with strong political feelings in the opposite direction. So if the political opinion isn't for the sake of truth, what value does it have if it just leads to conflict?
As for my previous post, the question was. Would you in your personal life be more confrontational when you see someone ignorant or would you leave them to their opinions?
Except it doesn't, because the nature of the opinion is that it leads to conflict. Beliefs lead to action, they aren't just something separate from the world.
It depends on the situation, but in my personal life I'm a very unconfrontational person. That has more to do with anxiety though than belief.
Well for many people they can tolerate someone with a different opinion than them. Provided they keep it under the rug and do not mention it etc. You can keep a friendship with people of different political opinions, it just might be good not to talk politics allot of the time.
Beliefs aren't separate from the world that is true but so long as they aren't bad e.g. head into racist territory than they won't be particularly bad.
18 Nov 2016, 6:12 pm
Shahunshah wrote:
Well for many people they can tolerate someone with a different opinion than them. Provided they keep it under the rug and do not mention it etc. You can keep a friendship with people of different political opinions, it just might be good not to talk politics allot of the time.
Of course, but this IS the political discussion board.
_________________
Cinnamon and sugary
Softly Spoken lies
You never know just how you look
Through other people's eyes
Autism FAQs http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt186115.html
18 Nov 2016, 6:23 pm
Ganondox wrote:
Shahunshah wrote:
Well for many people they can tolerate someone with a different opinion than them. Provided they keep it under the rug and do not mention it etc. You can keep a friendship with people of different political opinions, it just might be good not to talk politics allot of the time.
Of course, but this IS the political discussion board.
Jacoby
Veteran
Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash
| Similar Topics | |
|---|---|
| There are some who call me Tim |
01 Mar 2024, 9:12 pm |
| What do you call a fish without an eye? |
14 Mar 2024, 4:43 pm |
| Phone call win |
09 Feb 2024, 9:56 pm |
| Donald Trump Likely Going To Prison |
29 Feb 2024, 1:04 am |
