Can ideas be held accountable?

[waitasec]

None the less, your thoughts are your own....
unless you're hearing voices.

Too bad this thread is under general discussions.
Thoughts and feelings are of spirit.

so who here has the right to not be offended?

 

[Thief]

I agree, otherwise intent can just be used as an excuse.

Good intentions?

So many things go astray...under good intentions.

 

[Thief]

so who here has the right to not be offended?

Who indeed!

Here now your thoughts and feelings are your own.
No one will know...unless you reveal them.

What if you were made of 'glass'?
What happens when the next person can see through your words?

 

[waitasec]

Who indeed!

Here now your thoughts and feelings are your own.
No one will know...unless you reveal them.

are you suggesting to remain silent, in a debating forum?
:areyoucra

What if you were made of 'glass'?

who isn't?

 

[Thief]

are you suggesting to remain silent, in a debating forum?
:areyoucra



who isn't?

And why do you quote only the portion you can deal with?

 

[cablescavenger]

from Here.

This concept gave me pause. I do tend to hold beliefs accountable for their negative-- or positive, as it may be-- results. Some ideas are just horrible-- like the idea that certain races are inferior to others. And some ideas, by their very nature, can be powerful, persuasive, and controlling.

But, at the same time, I thought Photonic had a point. After all, an idea is only dangerous, or beneficial, if someone is acting upon it.

So, what do you think? Can ideas be held accountable?

Hi Favlun

I would agree with the quote you used that an idea is not accountable, but once you do something with that idea you are accountable.

For example: I would suggest an idea, is a thought but the moment someone start utilising it, then it ceases to become an idea, and becomes information, and by spreading it verbally, or in writing or by teaching it, then you become accountable for it.

You can even be held accountable for someone else's idea, if you utilise it as information.

 

[Thief]

Hi Favlun

I would agree with the quote you used that an idea is not accountable, but once you do something with that idea you are accountable.

For example: I would suggest an idea, is a thought but the moment someone start utilising it, then it ceases to become an idea, and becomes information, and by spreading it verbally, or in writing or by teaching it, then you become accountable for it.

You can even be held accountable for someone else's idea, if you utilise it as information.

As with Charles Manson?

 

[cablescavenger]

As with Charles Manson?

I suppose lol

I was thinking along tamer lines, but yours is more fun

 

[ChristineES]

I wish some people's mouths would stay shut (Just kidding).

We ought to also remember that if you quote half of a statement it has a different meaning that the whole one.

 

[waitasec]

And why do you quote only the portion you can deal with?

you mean this..

What happens when the next person can see through your words?

then the person would have to prove intent, which is impossible... especially on a online debating forum.

 

[waitasec]

And why do you quote only the portion you can deal with?

and why not answer the question?

are you suggesting to stay silent on a debating forum?

 

[waitasec]

As with Charles Manson?

you mean the beatles?

 

[Thief]

then the person would have to prove intent, which is impossible... especially on a online debating forum.

Nay....
The flow of thought is revealing.

If you truly express what you think and feel....it's you.

 

[waitasec]

Nay....
The flow of thought is revealing.

If you truly express what you think and feel....it's you.

i disagree
here is an example

The trend in the forum lately is that there are some people who seem to tell you that they know your own religion/ beliefs more than you do. Try to explain about your beliefs and they'll go "No, you're wrong. Christianity/theism/etc is like *this*, *that*, so and so..... BUT I'M NOT A CHRISTIAN/ THEIST/WHATEVER you believe in." What if I go like, "No, you're absolutely wrong. atheism/agnosticism/hinduism/ whatever your belief system is like *this*, *that*, BUT I AM NOT an atheist/agnostic/hindu/etc. I AM A CATHOLIC."

Any opinions?

now my my argument is:

i disagree

his example points the finger at different world views rather than difference's of opinion.

his example was self defeating. those "certain people" are everywhere, right?

his first post doesn't necessarily mean he meant that everyone who has a different would view than his does this sort of thing...which is why i contend that in order for his point to be understood he should have left it at:

The trend in the forum lately is that there are some people who seem to tell you that they know your own religion/ beliefs more than you do.

but by pointing the finger towards other world views he says that those people with other world views do this sort of thing.

do you see what i mean?

 

[Thief]

i disagree
here is an example

now my my argument is:

his first post doesn't necessarily mean he meant that everyone who has a different would view than his does this sort of thing...which is why i contend that in order for his point to be understood he should have left it at:

but by pointing the finger towards other world views he says that those people with other world views do this sort of thing.

do you see what i mean?

Through out this forum there is a continual discussion....
'I got it right...you have it wrong....'

On each occasion the choice of word and catch phrase reveals the spirit.

In rebuttal, I try to refrain the point of motivation.
It often doesn't help, when the would be opponent realizes....
he speaks from recital, not thought....
he speaks from dogma, rather than belief....
he speaks the rant of his belief, as if tongue service is a saving grace.

It's like kicking the soap box from under their feet.
Then they become defensive, and the discussion turns shallow.

But...analyzing the intent is always there.
Your choice of words and rhetoric reveal what goes on in your head.

Now, notice I refrain the word 'religion'.

That's because, the technique of thought is the target.
And people with bad ideas often mislead the unwary....
by simply choosing the words, and the rhetoric.

Not hold a deceiver accountable?...of course we do.
Even if that speaker thought he meant well.

 

[waitasec]

Through out this forum there is a continual discussion....
'I got it right...you have it wrong....'

On each occasion the choice of word and catch phrase reveals the spirit.

In rebuttal, I try to refrain the point of motivation.
It often doesn't help, when the would be opponent realizes....
he speaks from recital, not thought....
he speaks from dogma, rather than belief....
he speaks the rant of his belief, as if tongue service is a saving grace.

It's like kicking the soap box from under their feet.
Then they become defensive, and the discussion turns shallow.

But...analyzing the intent is always there.
Your choice of words and rhetoric reveal what goes on in your head.

Now, notice I refrain the word 'religion'.

That's because, the technique of thought is the target.
And people with bad ideas often mislead the unwary....
by simply choosing the words, and the rhetoric.

Not hold a deceiver accountable?...of course we do.
Even if that speaker thought he meant well.

attack the idea or how it is presented not the motive behind it...

the example i gave shows how the idea presented was flawed (from my perspective...which doesn't represent everyones perspective) i can only speak for myself.
just because i point out something that i think is a flaw in someone's argument, doesn't mean i think the entire idea behind the argument is flawed.
that is what happens when one assumes intent.

 

[Thief]

attack the idea or how it is presented not the motive behind it...

the example i gave shows how the idea presented was flawed (from my perspective...which doesn't represent everyones perspective) i can only speak for myself.
just because i point out something that i think is a flaw in someone's argument, doesn't mean i think the entire idea behind the argument is flawed.
that is what happens when one assumes intent.

And the upset of that is the persistence of someone playing word games
and complaining of insult.

I've seen so many discussions fall apart when the rebuttal fails.
Then it's ....you said...I said...I didn't say that...

And the foundation IS the intent.

After all, conversation with someone lacking intent?...is shallow.
Conversation with someone worried about having the last word ...is shallow.

Can't hide behind words and rhetoric.
Lawyers, judges, psychiatrists,...even your humble union steward has to
see between the lines.

Discussion is fine and good when resolve is sought.
It breaks down quickly when insult and winning become focus and trophy.

 

[waitasec]

And the upset of that is the persistence of someone playing word games
and complaining of insult.

I've seen so many discussions fall apart when the rebuttal fails.
Then it's ....you said...I said...I didn't say that...

And the foundation IS the intent.

After all, conversation with someone lacking intent?...is shallow.
Conversation with someone worried about having the last word ...is shallow.

Can't hide behind words and rhetoric.
Lawyers, judges, psychiatrists,...even your humble union steward has to
see between the lines.

Discussion is fine and good when resolve is sought.
It breaks down quickly when insult and winning become focus and trophy.

yup.
once the discussion turns to that i call out the ad hominem and then i just start to have fun with it

 

[Thief]

yup.
once the discussion turns to that i call out the ad hominem and then i just start to have fun with it

So you turn into a troll?

 

[waitasec]

So you turn into a troll?

no...


there is a difference between a troll and someone who doesn't put up with insults by turning it into a form of entertainment. but some can't see it that way because of the shallow assumptions they make of others...rather than just staying on topic.