Ever notice anything about this forum?

[waitasec]

Interesting....no attempt at all to change tactics? No shift to entertainment mode (for lack of a better term)?

after all attempts are exhausted...
i find if i get worked up about it then the focus is more about me

 

[Jose Fly]

I think he's just saying if you don't like what's on TV, change the channel.

Or perhaps remind yourself that it's only a TV show, so don't take it so seriously. In this case, remind yourself that it's only some internet forum that maybe on a good day, 50 people are going to see, so don't take it so seriously.

 

[Jose Fly]

after all attempts are exhausted...
i find if i get worked up about it then the focus is more about me

Oh absolutely. If I ever find myself getting worked up over what goes on in some internet forum, it'll be time to stop going to internet forums.

 

[waitasec]

Oh absolutely. If I ever find myself getting worked up over what goes on in some internet forum, it'll be time to stop going to internet forums.

not the forum all together but the discourse with certain individuals

if it turn into a shouting match in my head, like kilgore trout said, it's time to change the channel...

or create your own network

 

[LuisDantas]

If we get into a spat with another poster, It's in our control to either lead the discussion in a
positive direction, or failing that, avoid either the contentious issue with that poster.

That may be necessary sometimes. But that is hardly ever productive, for reasons that ought to be obvious. Avoidance is a lesser loss, but still a loss.

If we continue to be peeved by someone, we've only ourselves to blame for not fixing the problem.

No, not really. Unless you are proposing that all such problems are in fact limited to the abrasive nature of the exchanges themselves. That is simply not enough for things like political clashes.

Kilgore's changing the TV channel is a good metaphor for the avoidance aspect of this approach.

But it still fails to address the actual issue. Divergences may be serious business, and avoiding them is a non-solution at best, dangerous negligence at worst.

 

[Revoltingest]

That may be necessary sometimes. But that is hardly ever productive, for reasons that ought to be obvious. Avoidance is a lesser loss, but still a loss.

For you perhaps, but not for me. And don't invoke the argument of obviousness on me, metal man.

No, not really. Unless you are proposing that all such problems are in fact limited to the abrasive nature of the exchanges themselves. That is simply not enough for things like political clashes.

If you accept responsibility for your interactions, you might be surprised at the control you can have.

But it still fails to address the actual issue. Divergences may be serious business, and avoiding them is a non-solution at best, dangerous negligence at worst.

Negligence is a little over the top, eh? This is just a discussion forum.
We're under no obligation to endure tedium & abuse, which helps no one anyway.

 

[LuisDantas]

For you perhaps, but not for me. And don't invoke the argument of obviousness on me, metal man.

Why not? It is useful for emphasis, and hardly invalid when the explanation follows directly, as it did here.

If you accept responsibility for your interactions, you might be surprised at the control you can have.

Been there, done that. There is definitely such a thing as an unhealthily high degree of responsibility. At high enough levels it breeds neurotic delusions.

It is not quite as serious a problem as lack of personal responsibility, granted. But it is still ugly and pointless.

Negligence is a little over the top, eh? This is just a discussion forum.
We're under no obligation to endure tedium & abuse, which helps no one anyway.

True enough. Then again, avoidance has a better knack at becoming abusive than confrontation.

 

[Revoltingest]

Why not? It is useful for emphasis, and hardly invalid when the explanation follows directly, as it did here.

To me it seems obvious that my way of approaching discussions is more satisfying than yours.
That's the problem of arguing obviousness....different things are apparent to each of us.

Been there, done that. There is definitely such a thing as an unhealthily high degree of responsibility. At high enough levels it breeds neurotic delusions.

Wow! Being responsible sounds dangerous. I'll take that risk.

It is not quite as serious a problem as lack of personal responsibility, granted. But it is still ugly and pointless.

Say whuh?

True enough. Then again, avoidance has a better knack at becoming abusive than confrontation.

Now it's abusive to avoid unproductive rancorous discussions?
You certainly have a different way of seeing things.

 

[LuisDantas]

To me it seems obvious that my way of approaching discussions is more satisfying than yours.

It depends on one's goals, of course. Mine include avoiding avoidance. Isolation breeds conflict, it doesn't solve them.

That's the problem of arguing obviousness....different things are apparent to each of us.

Good thing that there is a Real World (TM) out there to calibrate our beliefs then, uh?

Wow! Being responsible sounds dangerous. I'll take that risk.

Of course it is dangerous. Existence itself is dangerous.

Say whuh?

Now it's abusive to avoid unproductive rancorous discussions?

It can easily be, yes. Didn't you ever notice? You seem to have so much interest in politics that it is weird if you failed to notice the damage that avoidance causes.

You certainly have a different way of seeing things.

So I am told. I don't aim for that. I just like to defend positions that I find actually solid and defendable.

 

[Revoltingest]

Of course it is dangerous. Existence itself is dangerous.

Now yer gettin all smoke & mirrors on me.

It can easily be, yes. Didn't you ever notice? You seem to have so much interest in politics that it is weird if you failed to notice the damage that avoidance causes.

I don't buy the claim that avoiding pointless arguments with quibbling posters causes any harm.
One cannot fight every conflict, so one is forced to avoid some anyway.

So I am told. I don't aim for that. I just like to defend positions that I find actually solid and defendable.

That solidity is an illusion.

 

[Thief]

Are we getting anywhere?

Has anyone some practical application?.....
representing someone else in the face of authority?

Or just enough interest to read some books on logic?
or arbitration?
or some supreme court rulings and the opinions that followed?

 

[Jose Fly]

not the forum all together but the discourse with certain individuals

if it turn into a shouting match in my head, like kilgore trout said, it's time to change the channel...

or create your own network

Again, I absolutely agree. I can't imagine anyone taking anything in these sorts of places so seriously that they get worked up over it.

99% of the time in these places, I'm sitting here laughing at what goes on. The other 1%, I'm not really paying attention.

 

[Thief]

Again, I absolutely agree. I can't imagine anyone taking anything in these sorts of places so seriously that they get worked up over it.

99% of the time in these places, I'm sitting here laughing at what goes on. The other 1%, I'm not really paying attention.

So you wrote this thread title....for what?

do you want to continue?

 

[LuisDantas]

Now yer gettin all smoke & mirrors on me.

By saying that existence itself is dangerous? If you say so.

I don't buy the claim that avoiding pointless arguments with quibbling posters causes any harm.

Good thing I made no such claim then. :yes:

One cannot fight every conflict, so one is forced to avoid some anyway.

True that (to a point). How one avoids conflict is also a significant decision. There is lack of time, there is lack of resources, and then there is lack of interest. The last one is not always wise.

That solidity is an illusion.

What leads you to believe in that?

 

[Jose Fly]

So you wrote this thread title....for what?

To express something I had noticed.

do you want to continue?

Continue what?

 

[Revoltingest]

By saying that existence itself is dangerous? If you say so.

I inferred a suggestion that since risk is in every act, that it minimizes differences between risks.

Good thing I made no such claim then. :yes:

Things aren't always as they appear. Now, that I can buy.

True that (to a point). How one avoids conflict is also a significant decision. There is lack of time, there is lack of resources, and then there is lack of interest. The last one is not always wise.

I don't claim to be wise. I just pick my battles....er....I just pick battles to avoid.

What leads you to believe in that?

To believe that a position is "solid", is just a view we hold at that moment.
Things so often feel worthy of certainty, yet turn out to need improvement.
I'd be more specific, but I can't remember what we were talking about too well.
Oh, yeah....your defense of what I see as abusive behavior towards creationists - that is what I don't find to be a solid position.

 

[LuisDantas]

Creationism, if it is defined as the belief in some religious concept at odds with the scientific findings (and that is how it is usually defined), is not really worth of much respect. That is a fact, and I stand by it.

 

[Revoltingest]

Creationism, if it is defined as the belief in some religious concept at odds with the scientific findings (and that is how it is usually defined), is not really worth of much respect. That is a fact, and I stand by it.

You won't see me offering them any respect either.
But I don't object to lack of respect, only to abuse.

 

[lunamoth]

You won't see me offering them any respect either.
But I don't object to lack of respect, only to abuse.

What is the world coming to when Revoltingest is the voice of reason.

 

[Jose Fly]

I've said for years: "Don't like being called stupid? Then stop saying stupid things."