First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next  Last
Post Reply Why, Instead Of Attempting To Argue Your Beliefs, Do You Remain Content in Ignoring Posts On The Assumption That You're
1888 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / F / The Ivory Tower
Online
Posted 5/26/16
Because the primary reasons people post on forums are to get attention and to feel good about themselves. These form the groundwork for our actions and motives. Things like honesty and decorum are incidental - sometimes arising from our selfishness, sometimes constructed to combat it.

I happen to value being corrected, so my actions flow from that and I try accordingly to conceptualize and construct the spaces in which I interact with people. And there exist spaces where people understand that this is necessary, like at work, in science, or in government. This forum is not primarily such a space; it functions the way the community of users wants it to function. And not everyone wants to debate, approaches it with the same standards, or even knows how.


PeripheralVisionary wrote:

Essentially, wouldn't the world be better when we do acknowledged we're wrong?


Maybe not: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Against_Method

Basically, Galileo was successful in his arguments against geocentrism partially because he used propaganda. And Thomas Kuhn argues that it's the stubborn clinging to scientific dogma that keeps science stable enough to progress. That doesn't actually mean anything goes (as Feyerabend says but doesn't actually mean); it means we should think twice before we say we know what it means to be objective.
Sogno- 
47263 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / F / SC
Offline
Posted 5/26/16
the title of this topic sounds like a Gintama episode or an adaptation of a light novel
45489 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M
Offline
Posted 5/26/16
Because who wants to willingly challenge their own beliefs? Those crazy people who tend to do well in the real world, that's who.
18867 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Imoutoland!
Online
Posted 5/26/16

Phersu wrote:

Because who wants to willingly challenge their own beliefs? Those crazy people who tend to do well in the real world, that's who.


Phersu.....is it you?
17693 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / F / In a van down by...
Offline
Posted 5/26/16
Welcome to trying to be reasonable on the Internet nowadays.

It's been always like this, but man oh man has it gotten uglier over the last few years, especially this year with US politics...
45489 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M
Offline
Posted 5/26/16

PeripheralVisionary wrote:

Phersu.....is it you?


Shhh, I'm hunting wabbits. Even though it is clearly duck season. But yeah. It is I.

18867 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Imoutoland!
Online
Posted 5/26/16

Phersu wrote:


PeripheralVisionary wrote:

Phersu.....is it you?


Shhh, I'm hunting wabbits. Even though it is clearly duck season. But yeah. It is I.



So......welcome back, eldritch abomination. Did you ever post that photo of yourself after the CR forums bested you in forum battle?
45489 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M
Offline
Posted 5/26/16

PeripheralVisionary wrote:

So......welcome back, eldritch abomination. Did you ever post that photo of yourself after the CR forums bested you in forum battle?


Don't ask questions. Just accept it. I'm also kinda surprised you're still here.
Humms 
11559 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / CAN, ON
Offline
Posted 5/26/16
Because I laugh when people must pull up evidence from another. Think for yourself, and then come argue with me, what do you really believe? Why must we look at someone else when we can easily offer the same amount of information from just our own assumptions.

Studies show this, or statistics show that. If we are talking about a history lesson, that's a completely different story, but we are talking about pure Bullshit that people love to defend for the sake of their unyielding efforts to study it, and forcing it onto people who deny it, and proving they are wrong, seriously it just makes me laugh, because this is what people spend their time on, studying the movements of another without actually picking up their own feet.

You cannot change my opinion, because my mind is far beyond statistics and studies. I am an idiot, it is what people like to call someone like me, that is the only thing I will accept. I have studied, all it results in is stress, holding onto information that doesn't matter to me, but matters to most people. What does it really accomplish? You're literally just running circles in the past , always trying to prove something from it. If information is useful I hold on to it and I never have to study it again, I expand and improve from my own abilities and understanding. Whenever I speak it is my own words I am speaking, that is the truest form of dignity, and we do not give way to the words others have copied.

I believe in constants, not statistics and Bullshit. There is knowledge in this world that is proven and I accept that, I also accept that I'm an idiot.... so answer me this. Why can't people accept they are idiots? An idiot can prove more when they finally achieve something, but someone who can't accept they are an idiot only believes in the words of another. They can't even believe in themselves let alone accept their idiocy.

So this all has to do with what you actually think of yourself, people like to hide it because they hate themselves, they want to use the words of others to show they are knowledgeable, they want to hide their own words because it is easier to believe in something like statistics, or studies. Is it that others simply can't think for themselves anymore? Because I have yet to see someone actually speak for themselves.

But don't worry, I'm just an idiot on the Internet so none of this matters because I have no studies, or statistics and sources to prove it
434 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / F
Offline
Posted 5/26/16

What we've got here is failure to communicate. Some men you just can't reach. So you get what we had here last week, which is the way he wants it. Well, he gets it. I don't like it any more than you men.
Ejanss 
15959 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 5/26/16 , edited 5/26/16

Yume_Mirai wrote:
This. Sometimes its almost delusional that they can't be wrong. Having said that, there are those who try to shove a thing down others' throats as well.


Some people post hoping to rally the idea they just came up with, and can't deal with the fact that the "rally" they imagined in their head isn't happening because the poster is being told to his or face that their fundamental concept may be wrong or even just plain goofy.

The first instinct is to try and rally majority support for the incorrect opinion, by pretending that those who say "No, 2+2 does not equal 5, nor does it 'equal Bacon' either" are actually just mean people in the minority, and that if you ridicule said Mean-People, the question will be decided by a shouting-down of fan majority, if they keep their "underground Internet campaign" going stubbornly enough to develop a following.
(Just look how well it "worked" shouting down all those bad reviews for Batman v. Superman.)

Or as Tomo put it, in Azumanga Daioh's question of "Do reindeer exist"?: "I'm not stupid, okay? I'm not stupid!!"
27148 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 5/26/16

auroraloose wrote:

Because the primary reasons people post on forums are to get attention and to feel good about themselves. These form the groundwork for our actions and motives. Things like honesty and decorum are incidental - sometimes arising from our selfishness, sometimes constructed to combat it.

I happen to value being corrected, so my actions flow from that and I try accordingly to conceptualize and construct the spaces in which I interact with people. And there exist spaces where people understand that this is necessary, like at work, in science, or in government. This forum is not primarily such a space; it functions the way the community of users wants it to function. And not everyone wants to debate, approaches it with the same standards, or even knows how.


Much the same boat as this lovely lady.


auroraloose wrote:
Maybe not: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Against_Method

Basically, Galileo was successful in his arguments against geocentrism partially because he used propaganda. And Thomas Kuhn argues that it's the stubborn clinging to scientific dogma that keeps science stable enough to progress. That doesn't actually mean anything goes (as Feyerabend says but doesn't actually mean); it means we should think twice before we say we know what it means to be objective.


I did want to ask about this though. Propaganda is useful when it comes to reaching a majority of humans. As for scientific dogma being why science is stable enough to progress--I'm have to disagree. People that remain bound to scientific dogma dig their heels in rather than step forward. I find it hard to think that it is dogmatism that keeps the scientific community stable. Unless you're conflating axioms with dogma? However, I would say scientific dogma is what keeps the general population supportive of it (allowing it to progress [funding + introduction]). So in that manner, I would agree.

I suppose I'm confused as what you mean by it stabilizing.

20072 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Hoosierville
Offline
Posted 5/26/16
Where are these people that are denying evolution? I've yet to see anyone posting such things outside of trolling.


Here take this you will need it:
1888 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / F / The Ivory Tower
Online
Posted 5/26/16 , edited 5/26/16

PrinceJudar wrote:


auroraloose wrote:

Because the primary reasons people post on forums are to get attention and to feel good about themselves. These form the groundwork for our actions and motives. Things like honesty and decorum are incidental - sometimes arising from our selfishness, sometimes constructed to combat it.

I happen to value being corrected, so my actions flow from that and I try accordingly to conceptualize and construct the spaces in which I interact with people. And there exist spaces where people understand that this is necessary, like at work, in science, or in government. This forum is not primarily such a space; it functions the way the community of users wants it to function. And not everyone wants to debate, approaches it with the same standards, or even knows how.


Much the same boat as this lovely lady.





PrinceJudar wrote:

I did want to ask about this though. Propaganda is useful when it comes to reaching a majority of humans. As for scientific dogma being why science is stable enough to progress--I'm have to disagree. People that remain bound to scientific dogma dig their heels in rather than step forward. I find it hard to think that it is dogmatism that keeps the scientific community stable. Unless you're conflating axioms with dogma? However, I would say scientific dogma is what keeps the general population supportive of it (allowing it to progress [funding + introduction]). So in that manner, I would agree.

I suppose I'm confused as what you mean by it stabilizing.

Yeah, I meant the axioms. Because sometimes they change: we used to think there were such things as absolute space, time, and simultaneity, that all waves required media like water waves do, that all traits could be passed down to offspring, that shared morphology always implied common ancestry, that we should expect to find lots of vestigial organs and parts, and lots more. Science doesn't paralyze itself doubting everything; it picks a good direction and sticks with it until it doesn't work. And sometimes that means ignoring or explaining away data that go against our axioms.

All this comes from Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, which was one of the most important philosophical texts of the 20th century. (I like saying that; it makes me feel smart.) Here's a good quote from the wikipedia page:


As a paradigm is stretched to its limits, anomalies — failures of the current paradigm to take into account observed phenomena — accumulate. Their significance is judged by the practitioners of the discipline. Some anomalies may be dismissed as errors in observation, others as merely requiring small adjustments to the current paradigm that will be clarified in due course. Some anomalies resolve themselves spontaneously, having increased the available depth of insight along the way. But no matter how great or numerous the anomalies that persist, Kuhn observes, the practicing scientists will not lose faith in the established paradigm until a credible alternative is available; to lose faith in the solvability of the problems would in effect mean ceasing to be a scientist.
29047 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 5/26/16 , edited 5/26/16
Dear lord, is PV still entertaining this self-indulgent BS?

PV, you're being dense. It doesn't help when you have now TWICE predicated your post on what can be distilled down to "I'm right about these topics, why doesn't everyone agree and bow and scrape before my opinion?"

You seem to think that just because you (or some hypothetical "someone") posts some kind of "facts", that this must automatically cause people to change their stance and agree. You then get all butt-hurt when they don't. Minor problem: when you have complex problems, there are frequently numerous data points supporting *both* sides of the argument. *Both* sides frequently have facts backing them up.

Beyond that, and perhaps more importantly, is the fact that "facts"- particularly statistics- can very frequently be interpreted to mean different things, when interpreted by different people. For instance, the "fact" that homosexual individuals have measurable differences in brainwave patterns from heterosexuals can be used to "prove" that homosexuality and/ or gender is inherent to a person's personality and should be respected, *OR* can be used to "prove" that homosexuals suffer from a brain disorder or mental illness. The recurrent laryngeal nerve can be used to "prove" that god has a sense of humor/ "designs from a common palette", or "prove" the theory of evolution. Increased crime rates in predominately black neighborhoods can be used to "prove" that blacks are inherently violent, or "prove" that racist policies have disadvantaged blacks. Each of these conclusions, from *exactly* the same data, are equally valid.

Interpretation of data is as, and often MORE, important than the raw data itself.

Ultimately, if you've failed to convince anyone, the problem is just as much that YOUR argument is unconvincing, as that THEY are just being dense. I guarantee they feel the same about you as you are currently whining about them. More than that, you have to be able to understand that people *have reasons* to believe what they believe, *even if you think it is wrong*. Sometimes they have just as much data as you; possibly even the *same* data as you, but come to a different conclusion. Because unless the topic is "mathematical proofs", there is usually no cut-and-dry answer.

You've got a bit of growing up to do yet.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.