Loss of interest in the PPR forums

Post Reply New Topic

That would make an interesting topic of debate.

+1

I've never liked political-discussion forums anyway. I've yet to come across anyone who can debate me and answer my questions or respond to my statements without saying "Your source is corrupted" or "You've been brainwashed" or "You love Reagan so much it makes you gay" or "You hate the poor, elderly and people with pre-existing conditions" or "you're a fascist" or "you don't know what liberty means" or "you're just as much of a statist as the liberals you're against" or "you can't see Bush did what you say Obama is doing" or- I could go on. They always try to either change the subject, or say that my argument is nonsense and therefore they can't argue against "nonsense".

I've noticed topics kind of come and go in waves. When I first found this place, I was ecstatic. There were tons of religious debate threads, and I soooo love to talk religion. I'm not so into politics and, in truth, have no idea if I'm left, right, conservative, whatever.. fairly certain I'm not a Nazi.. (Can you be a democratic communist? lol I don't know..They seem to contradict each other, but I might be somewhere in the middle.*shrug*) But my point is, when I first came here, I found tons of things I wanted to comment on. It was probably the billionth cycle of that topic, but new for me. These days I read far more than I post. I still love getting insight to how others think and view things; sometimes for laughs, sometimes for serious contemplation, but I don't often feel driven to comment to most. I'll wait for this cycle of abortion and political prick topics to be done... (Really, a guy named Wiener gets in trouble with his namesake? It seems destiny, not travesty.)

I still think PPR is one of the greatest things on the planet... sex, chocolate, PPR.. right? LOL

You're one of the worst ones here.

hmm i enjoy ppr,
i can easily see how some people might be easily offended by many of the threads, some they have every right to.
i get offended sometimes, then again i find it makes me think and as such i sometimes enjoy it, afterwards.

usually i dont get that emotionally involved in the topics, though at times there are issues where people are plain wrong for the wrong reasons.

i find some of the pecking that has been going on to be nothing more than poorly disguised personal attacks,
i like being able to discuss in as civil a manner as possible, i try to do so in all my posts, however toes will be stepped upon when some of these issues are discussed.

Ha, you're much worse than I am. I mean, dear goodness, you are both arrogant, and not as clever as you think you are. You want to state opinions, but show no interest in the underlying methods to arrive at good conclusions.

Last edited by Awesomelyglorious on 12 Jun 2011, 5:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.

It's most likely a matter of internet activity correlating with psychological traits that correlate with other beliefs. I mean, the high presence of atheists and the high presence of socially liberal opinions likely have a common cause.

I'm losing interest in the PPR lately, it has been entertaining at first, but it gets a bit tiresome after some time (porn is getting more interesting to me nowadays)

Some people say that a place like this is mostly about people bullshiting (yeah well philosophy is mostly bs anyway) and not getting much of utility from this when it comes to real life issues, (mental masturbation) I suppose that can be attractive for the socially akward aspie to distract themselves for real world issues.

I've seen it. The notion among the arguers was social conservatives have lower IQ's and therefore do not use the internet.

I say it's because a majority of message board users are younger (18-30), and young people today tend to be much more liberal than their parents.

I'd probably say your reasoning is more likely to account for the variance. It is also likely that social conservatives are not as media-oriented and technology oriented as social liberals.

EDIT: On thinking on this, this could either be seen as just part of your reasoning. It could be seen as a cultural issue.(which was my reasoning) Or, of course, it could be seen as this relating to education and/or IQ.

Last edited by Awesomelyglorious on 12 Jun 2011, 5:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I don't perceive any lack of social conservatives on the net or on this forum.

There are less of them here than in the general population. They still exist here though. It is just that the other view is more popular and better defended.

I grew up in a different era than most posters here and am way out of synch with the general public in the USA which, it seems to me, is far too much under the influence of the conservative controlled media. The outrageous terrorist murder of thousands of more or less neutral people in 9/11 which weaponized the G.W.Bush administration to strongly flavor totalitarian control of a good deal of normal civilian life with very little push-back by effective civil rights groups may have been a happy circumstance for the oppressive policies and unjustified wars they favored but it certainly is fertile ground for conspiracy theories. The history of police brutality in the USA is a very long one, especially in relationship to conflicts involving labor rights, but the police in these later years is getting totally out of control with their prevention of reporting of police brutality by public cell phone cameras. The moves towards a totalitarian state are dismaying, especially since most labor and civil rights strengths seem to be fading totally away in a strangely complacent electorate infiltrated by total crazies and the rapid growth of general invasion of privacy with new technology reminiscent of "1984"
This atmosphere colors a good deal of political discussion here and leaves one with a sense of helplessness so that the web in general boils down to merely blowing off useless steam in ineffective bitching.

The problems with religious discussions is, from my point of view, that most religions have almost nothing to do with the real world of hard earned factual concepts but reside in feeding adherents naive wishful thinking to make people feel better over the injustices of daily life by encouraging inaction on real problems with the concept that justice awaits in the afterlife. To merely declare this as silly (which is the only way I can see it) is taken as civil brutality in the class of kicking bunnies and logic is a useless tool in this miasma of self indulgent mess anyway so discussions quickly get out of hand by people who decline to think clearly and accept reality as it appears.

In general, my contributions have a tendency to become acerbic and I am usually ignored so, over time, my enthusiasm for discussion here has declined considerably,

Actually, I find he is not. He is uneven, yes, and a little too into the strident thing but basically a plus. Needs to expand his horizons and loosen up on the formality is all.

Really? Hmm... who is the worst then, and how may I emulate them?

I tend to think a lot of the formality is a plus. Particularly given that I think I try to see more good in other ideas than Orwell, who is undoubtedly better at formality than I am. (Note: This is not a major effort at criticism to Orwell, as I think he knows that I tend to respect his posts somewhat)

There are three main problems, in my opinion:

1. Those who try to "prove" their faith-based claims with everything from apocryphal writings, to mis-used maths, to quantum theory, to false data and fallacious reasoning.

2. Those who refuse to admit that proving a faith-based claim is virtually impossible.

3. Those who attack the person who attacked their beliefs.

Other than that, it's quite fun!