Civility

[jonathan180iq]

Frankly, I'm pretty concerned with how unruly our public discourse is becoming.

I think blaming "the media" is a cop-out, as they're only responsible for their content. We are responsible for our response to that content. We are also responsible for our acceptance of said content. I think, were we a more discerning public, we wouldn't have half of the problems that we do with information manipulation.

Bad ideas are bad ideas, and I'm a champion for discussing them, even to the point of raised voices. But civility and decorum go a long way in helping to change the minds of those you disagree with, especially on emotionally touchy subjects.

In logical and formal debate, the cardinal rule is to always address the idea being presented, and not the presenter, their baggage, or external, non-presented topics. Fallacies are always fallacies, even if you're filled with copious amounts of righteous indignation.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

... as when Trump refers to the White Nationalists and informs us that there are good people on both sides.

... as when children are ripped from the arms of their parents.

... as when people of color are gunned down in the street.

... as when refugees are informed that they are the wrong religion and/or ethnicity to warrant refuge.

Yep - civility is certainly the problem upon which we should focus.

 

[bobhikes]

Frankly, I'm pretty concerned with how unruly our public discourse is becoming.

I think blaming "the media" is a cop-out, as they're only responsible for their content. We are responsible for our response to that content. We are also responsible for our acceptance of said content. I think, were we a more discerning public, we wouldn't have half of the problems that we do with information manipulation.

Bad ideas are bad ideas, and I'm a champion for discussing them, even to the point of raised voices. But civility and decorum go a long way in helping to change the minds of those you disagree with, especially on emotionally touchy subjects.

In logical and formal debate, the cardinal rule is to always address the idea being presented, and not the presenter, their baggage, or external, non-presented topics. Fallacies are always fallacies, even if you're filled with copious amounts of righteous indignation.

Its not the media, its the internet. People are getting comfortable with the anonymity of the internet and spilling it into real life. It does seem though that the internet is starting to fight back. I see just the beginnings of shutting down the trolls but the movement is there, hopefully it picks up steam.

 

[Revoltingest]

Frankly, I'm pretty concerned with how unruly our public discourse is becoming.

I think blaming "the media" is a cop-out, as they're only responsible for their content. We are responsible for our response to that content. We are also responsible for our acceptance of said content. I think, were we a more discerning public, we wouldn't have half of the problems that we do with information manipulation.

Bad ideas are bad ideas, and I'm a champion for discussing them, even to the point of raised voices. But civility and decorum go a long way in helping to change the minds of those you disagree with, especially on emotionally touchy subjects.

In logical and formal debate, the cardinal rule is to always address the idea being presented, and not the presenter, their baggage, or external, non-presented topics. Fallacies are always fallacies, even if you're filled with copious amounts of righteous indignation.

Anger is the source.
Immaturity is the enabler.
Injustice is the excuse.
Incivility is the goal.
Failure is the result.

 

[Revoltingest]

Its not the media, its the internet.

It's each & every individual making a choice.

 

[Audie]

... as when Trump refers to the White Nationalists and informs us that there are good people on both sides.

... as when children are ripped from the arms of their parents.

... as when people of color are gunned down in the street.

... as when refugees are informed that they are the wrong religion and/or ethnicity to warrant refuge.

Yep - civility is certainly the problem upon which we should focus.

"good people on both sides".

you think one side is all good, the other all bad?

"children ripped" Not so good, but, for all that it seems
to have increased, it is hardly new

"people of color"...of course, most of them are gunned
down by eachohter, cops get gunned down, and more
whites than blacks are shot. AND, it is a very small percent of police related shootings that are not
entirely legit.

Did you know, btw, that civilians using deadly force
are more law abiding and make fewer mistakes than copes?

Are refugees told they are the wrong religion etc,
as you said?

You sure?

Would you say that there are countries of origin
about which we should be suspicious?

Or are you an open borders kinda guy?

 

[Quintessence]

In honesty, I haven't noticed much of a shift - I don't feel there's any "becoming" about it. It's been this way since I can remember. The only shift I've noticed is more attention to certain ideas, a phenomena largely ushered in by the mistake of electing a complete moron to the head of state. But things go in phases. It's expected to see the pendulum swing back in the other direction. Eventually it'll start swinging the other way again.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

"good people on both sides".

you think one side is all good, the other all bad?

"children ripped" Not so good, but, for all that it seems
to have increased, it is hardly new

"people of color"...of course, most of them are gunned
down by eachohter, cops get gunned down, and more
whites than blacks are shot. AND, it is a very small percent of police related shootings that are not
entirely legit.

It's good to know where you stand.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Sadly, civility is in more short supply than rare earth.

 

[Revoltingest]

In honesty, I haven't noticed much of a shift - I don't feel there's any "becoming" about it. It's been this way since I can remember. The only shift I've noticed is more attention to certain ideas, a phenomena largely ushered in by the mistake of electing a complete moron to the head of state. But things go in phases. It's expected to see the pendulum swing back in the other direction. Eventually it'll start swinging the other way again.

Incivility is more noticeable when one is on the side enduring it.
Some are more attuned to Trump's incivility, while others will see
the left wing's. Both examples of abuse look unprecedented to me.
It's worse than I saw in the 60s & 70s...that was about issues.
This time, it's personal.
Sure, sure, there are still issues. But the uncivil ones subordinate
those to personal hatred, the real motivator.

 

[Stanyon]

... as when Trump refers to the White Nationalists and informs us that there are good people on both sides.

He meant both sides

... as when children are ripped from the arms of their parents.

That were attempting to cross the border illegally

... as when people of color are gunned down in the street.

The vast majority of the time they are gunned down by other people of colour that are not police officers.

Black police officers kill more blacks because police departments attempt to have black officers in majority black areas thus increasing the chance of blacks being killed by black police officers but apparently it's not newsworthy. It seems it is a more compelling story if a white or hispanic police officer kills a person of colour so it is reported more often.
Some statistics on people killed by police by race:
-2017
457 whites killed by police
223 blacks killed by police
179 Hispanics killed by police
44 other
84 unknown

2018 so far 47 whites 23 blacks 17 hispanic 3 other 56 unknown
• People shot to death by U.S. police 2017-2018, by race | Statistic

Given the fact that the number of Hispanics killed by police are almost equal to the number of blacks killed by police when is the last time you heard a story on the news about a Hispanic being shot by police? Please consider the fact that Hispanics and blacks population of the U.S. are pretty close in numbers.

... as when refugees are informed that they are the wrong religion and/or ethnicity to warrant refuge.

What religion might that be and where are they from? never heard ethnicity as a reason for refusing entry.

Yep - civility is certainly the problem upon which we should focus.

The truth beyond the hype is what we should focus on, not knee jerk race/religion hooks.

 

[Revoltingest]

It's good to know where you stand.

Having read many of Audi'es posts, I see that
she stands for reason, civility, kindness, & justice.
Nothing wrong with that.

 

[pearl]

It's each & every individual making a choice.

And critical to that, what, who informs your choice. Too often we do not look to be informed but simply search for what we already agree with.

 

[Audie]

It's good to know where you stand.

I dont "stand" on those issues other than trying
to see them as they really are as opposed to
the political stance du jour.

I dont have any particular respect for either
the demicans repucrats.

As an immigrant, I cannot for example. very
well be "anti immigrant".

You didnt say if you favour an open border.

 

[Revoltingest]

And critical to that, what, who informs your choice. Too often we do not look to be informed but simply search for what we already agree with.

Aye, & the media are somewhat responsible.
But the individual is ultimately responsible for acting.

 

[Audie]

Having read many of Audi'es posts, I see that
she stands for reason, civility, kindness, & justice.
Nothing wrong with that.

Well, sometimes.

 

[Revoltingest]

Well, sometimes.

More often than some here.
So for a short person, you're pretty good.

 

[exchemist]

... as when Trump refers to the White Nationalists and informs us that there are good people on both sides.

... as when children are ripped from the arms of their parents.

... as when people of color are gunned down in the street.

... as when refugees are informed that they are the wrong religion and/or ethnicity to warrant refuge.

Yep - civility is certainly the problem upon which we should focus.

I think your sarcasm is a bit harsh. If one reads about the 1930s, the way the various fascist movements started was with a coarsening of discourse, facile diagnoses of problems and narratives of victimhood and betrayal. We can already see that in Trump's case what was once outrageous rudeness and vulgarity has become accepted with a resigned shrug. Next have come the outrageous ideas, such as those you list - and outrageous policies to match. And then, building on the cult of rudeness and aggressive speech, we get rude and aggressive behaviour by Trump followers.

Trump and Bannon's comforting message to their followers is that it is OK to be an a***hole, basically. So we can all relax, get in touch with our inner a***hole.........and then go out and kick a few spicks and n**gers.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

you think one side is all good, the other all bad?

When one of the sides is nazis? Yeah, I feel pretty comfortable calling all of one side "bad"

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Frankly, I'm pretty concerned with how unruly our public discourse is becoming.

I think blaming "the media" is a cop-out, as they're only responsible for their content. We are responsible for our response to that content. We are also responsible for our acceptance of said content. I think, were we a more discerning public, we wouldn't have half of the problems that we do with information manipulation.

Bad ideas are bad ideas, and I'm a champion for discussing them, even to the point of raised voices. But civility and decorum go a long way in helping to change the minds of those you disagree with, especially on emotionally touchy subjects.

In logical and formal debate, the cardinal rule is to always address the idea being presented, and not the presenter, their baggage, or external, non-presented topics. Fallacies are always fallacies, even if you're filled with copious amounts of righteous indignation.

I saw this on Facebook and thought of this thread: