|
Post by akourios on Apr 26, 2019 18:11:05 GMT
If we communicate to influence others, then we are probably aiming to change their perception. If this is the goal of the conversation then we too should be open to the possibility of being influenced since doing otherwise would negate our intend to influence others in the first place. If the goal is to argue effectively and with purpose, we need to be comfortable with changing our beliefs/values, and trust that the conversation is aimed at something that’s of mutual benefit. This is important because thinking that the conversation favours only the other side then their facts would not be influential because they don’t improve our position. The possibility for change is also as important because it is the cause for all evolution, the relevant evolution being improvement in the way of thinking. Now, if you don’t believe in evolution then the only way for mutual understanding is convincing you that evolution is real, or you convincing me that it is not. Still, changing one’s beliefs/values is considered evolution. However, the level of understanding in the conversation would depend on the communicators’ ability to process information and that depends on their intelligence and common sense. I view intelligence as the amount of information that you know, how well you validate this information (truth from falsehood), how well you can link this information together, and how well you can recall it. This definition of intelligence may explain how arguments/ideas are limited to the amount of information that one possesses, how capable we are of using information (e.g. 1+1 equals 2 and not solely 1+1), and how the true result of the conversation can be influenced by our ability to recall all the relevant information in order for it be used in our interpretations. If a person does not have well developed forms of intelligence, then his understanding would be limited to his level of development.
Assuming that perception is relative to the individual, to effectively engage in conversation we would need common sense. Common sense can be characterised as the ability to mentally unite the information conveyed by the five physical senses. Then, to be able to talk about the information gathered, we labelled and named the things (common language) that are associated with it. That is common sense. Now we can say that without common sense, conversation would be meaningless and incomprehensible. For example, a trans-man is not a man unless he presents the biology of a man. Suggesting the opposite would mean that I am not using the five physical senses or that I am refusing the international label/name, thus there is no common sense. Of course common sense can be associated with intelligence because again, "If a person does not have well developed forms of intelligence, then his understanding would be limited to his level of development" and his perception would vary. However, if we choose to neglect the roots of common sense (physical senses + common language) then we should provide improved mechanisms for making sense of the world or humanity will regress due to lesser cognition.
Often, an atheist cannot convince a theist that his definition of God does not exist like the theist cannot convince the atheist that his God exists. The reason is that both sides expect to receive information that is related to their level of intelligence. However, if your aim in the communication is to really influence, then you can’t say things like “lack of knowledge leads to faith” or “if you don’t believe you will suffer” because this would destroy the conversation by corrupting mutual trust. Instead, we should communicate at a level that slightly exceeds the opposing side’s level of intelligence. For example, talk to babies like a baby and all they learn is baby talk. Talk to them like adults and they won’t understand a thing. The solution to this is finding the moderate where they mostly understand what you say but they are challenged at the same time. Then you would ask why would we want to challenge them? Because it opens them to the possibility of change and allows them to process information gradually.
Therefore, intelligence from both sides is the key to effective communications and common sense is the medium.
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Apr 26, 2019 18:16:32 GMT
Well, don't we all have a right to influence and to being influenced? Like, I mostly prefer to influence than being influnced. For example, if you're trying to influence a drug addict to put his life together why should you be open to being influenced by his life of addiction? Addiction isn't needed and people should be always closed to it not open.
|
|
|
Post by akourios on Apr 26, 2019 18:37:38 GMT
We can say the same for people who believe that vaccines cause autism. They are not willing to change their opinion because they think that their life will be affected negatively. I believe this goes in the intelligence category.
How do we expect other people to be open to the possibility that there is something which they don't know/understand if we ourselves aren't? Imagine two people with opposite opinions which they are not willing to change. Then there is no communication since we cannot influence. What is left is inaction or in extreme cases violence.
|
|
|
Post by jonbain on Apr 26, 2019 21:50:16 GMT
Well, don't we all have a right to influence and to being influenced? Like, I mostly prefer to influence than being influnced. For example, if you're trying to influence a drug addict to put his life together why should you be open to being influenced by his life of addiction? Addiction isn't needed and people should be always closed to it not open. Are you familiar with Frank Herbert's 'Dune'? The spice melange was considered an addictive drug to some, but for others they attained mental transformation giving them improved mental and sense experience. You assume that if someone is labelled 'drug addict', then they are intrinsically bad, even though almost every illegal drug has a legal version that has precisely the same effect. Ritalin = cocaine Prozac = ecstasy Morphine = heroin Society always seems to need an 'underclass' which it labels and constructs as inferior in such a way that they become the scapegoat for those who are suffering from an inferiority complex. Blacks, women, jews, and many other portions of the social strata have been victimized like this through the ages. All illegal drugs have less real damaging effects than the laws against them which amount to a legal holocaust, no different than the various pogroms, race-based legislation and other atrocities in history. Alcohol does more physical harm than all the illegal drugs in the world put together. At least a quarter of legal medicines are just as toxic or more toxic than most illegal substances. The alleged effects on the mind are almost always entirely a placebo effect, and amount to superstitious pseudo-science generally of a racist nature.
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Apr 26, 2019 23:32:23 GMT
Well, don't we all have a right to influence and to being influenced? Like, I mostly prefer to influence than being influnced. For example, if you're trying to influence a drug addict to put his life together why should you be open to being influenced by his life of addiction? Addiction isn't needed and people should be always closed to it not open. Are you familiar with Frank Herbert's 'Dune'? The spice melange was considered an addictive drug to some, but for others they attained mental transformation giving them improved mental and sense experience. You assume that if someone is labelled 'drug addict', then they are intrinsically bad, even though almost every illegal drug has a legal version that has precisely the same effect. Ritalin = cocaine Prozac = ecstasy Morphine = heroin Society always seems to need an 'underclass' which it labels and constructs as inferior in such a way that they become the scapegoat for those who are suffering from an inferiority complex. Blacks, women, jews, and many other portions of the social strata have been victimized like this through the ages. All illegal drugs have less real damaging effects than the laws against them which amount to a legal holocaust, no different than the various pogroms, race-based legislation and other atrocities in history. Alcohol does more physical harm than all the illegal drugs in the world put together. At least a quarter of legal medicines are just as toxic or more toxic than most illegal substances. The alleged effects on the mind are almost always entirely a placebo effect, and amount to superstitious pseudo-science generally of a racist nature. So you're saying the meth addict should make people meth addicts too so they will die? I guess it'll get rid of the not smart people but I don't think people should die. Or if we have a shooter who likes to go to big events to kill as many people possible. I don't wanr any influence from him nor do I even want to talk to such a person.
|
|
|
Post by akourios on Apr 27, 2019 0:35:46 GMT
Illegal drugs are bad or killing is bad falls in the category of moral principles. Then questions like what are moral principles and why have them, arise. If you encounter someone who questions your morals then you should expect an explanation for why to reject them. This is being open to change.
|
|
|
Post by akourios on Apr 28, 2019 13:54:34 GMT
Are you familiar with Frank Herbert's 'Dune'? The spice melange was considered an addictive drug to some, but for others they attained mental transformation giving them improved mental and sense experience. You assume that if someone is labelled 'drug addict', then they are intrinsically bad, even though almost every illegal drug has a legal version that has precisely the same effect. Ritalin = cocaine Prozac = ecstasy Morphine = heroin Society always seems to need an 'underclass' which it labels and constructs as inferior in such a way that they become the scapegoat for those who are suffering from an inferiority complex. Blacks, women, jews, and many other portions of the social strata have been victimized like this through the ages. All illegal drugs have less real damaging effects than the laws against them which amount to a legal holocaust, no different than the various pogroms, race-based legislation and other atrocities in history. Alcohol does more physical harm than all the illegal drugs in the world put together. At least a quarter of legal medicines are just as toxic or more toxic than most illegal substances. The alleged effects on the mind are almost always entirely a placebo effect, and amount to superstitious pseudo-science generally of a racist nature. So you're saying the meth addict should make people meth addicts too so they will die? I guess it'll get rid of the not smart people but I don't think people should die. Or if we have a shooter who likes to go to big events to kill as many people possible. I don't wanr any influence from him nor do I even want to talk to such a person. Elizabeth I see that you are certain that we shouldn't murder people (of course I agree). You are certain because you were taught that it is wrong. Why is it wrong? Because of moral principles. Like I said before, questions like what are moral principles and why have them arise. If you would reject your moral principles you would have done it for something that is even better and benefits you more. I think it is the same as providing alternative mechanisms for common sense. If we are to accept something different, it must be superior than the one we have. That is why if the opposing side has something to say that REALLY matters then you will know, IF you are self-aware. I believe a part of self-awareness is realising that our beliefs/values are not absolute and that is why we need to be open to change.
|
|
|
Post by akourios on Apr 28, 2019 21:09:53 GMT
"If this is the goal of the conversation then we too should be open to the possibility of being influenced since doing otherwise would negate our intend to influence others in the first place. " This statement is false. It's possible to intend to influence others while not being open to the possibility of being influenced. What I should have said instead is if we intend to influence then we too should be open to the possibility of being influenced if our goal is true enlightenment.
|
|
|
Post by jonbain on May 1, 2019 20:47:43 GMT
Are you familiar with Frank Herbert's 'Dune'? The spice melange was considered an addictive drug to some, but for others they attained mental transformation giving them improved mental and sense experience. You assume that if someone is labelled 'drug addict', then they are intrinsically bad, even though almost every illegal drug has a legal version that has precisely the same effect. Ritalin = cocaine Prozac = ecstasy Morphine = heroin Society always seems to need an 'underclass' which it labels and constructs as inferior in such a way that they become the scapegoat for those who are suffering from an inferiority complex. Blacks, women, jews, and many other portions of the social strata have been victimized like this through the ages. All illegal drugs have less real damaging effects than the laws against them which amount to a legal holocaust, no different than the various pogroms, race-based legislation and other atrocities in history. Alcohol does more physical harm than all the illegal drugs in the world put together. At least a quarter of legal medicines are just as toxic or more toxic than most illegal substances. The alleged effects on the mind are almost always entirely a placebo effect, and amount to superstitious pseudo-science generally of a racist nature. So you're saying the meth addict should make people meth addicts too so they will die? I guess it'll get rid of the not smart people but I don't think people should die. Or if we have a shooter who likes to go to big events to kill as many people possible. I don't wanr any influence from him nor do I even want to talk to such a person. Meth effects the body in much the same way as diet pills, whether ephedrine or pseudo-ephedrine. Most effect of most drugs is a placebo effect. Are you campaigning for alcohol to be illegal? That kills more than a million people a year, which is more than all the illegal drugs, and prescription drugs put together. As for when people go psycho, if you think it cannot happen to you, I assure you that it can. Everybody has a limit on the amount of abuse they can suffer, and the no mind is immune to it. The surest way to push someone who is borderline over the edge is to reject and disrespect them. You talk to me, and in feb 1990 I was ready to commit genocide against the afrikaners because of their nazi govt. To this day I still get hate from them. But I turn it round, and give them understanding even as they undermine everything in my life. I may still lose it, and wipe them out, but it will not be for lack of trying to do things the right way. I can only take so much evil, before I retaliate.
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on May 1, 2019 21:09:38 GMT
So you're saying the meth addict should make people meth addicts too so they will die? I guess it'll get rid of the not smart people but I don't think people should die. Or if we have a shooter who likes to go to big events to kill as many people possible. I don't wanr any influence from him nor do I even want to talk to such a person. Meth effects the body in much the same way as diet pills, whether ephedrine or pseudo-ephedrine. Most effect of most drugs is a placebo effect. Are you campaigning for alcohol to be illegal? That kills more than a million people a year, which is more than all the illegal drugs, and prescription drugs put together. As for when people go psycho, if you think it cannot happen to you, I assure you that it can. Everybody has a limit on the amount of abuse they can suffer, and the no mind is immune to it. The surest way to push someone who is borderline over the edge is to reject and disrespect them. You talk to me, and in feb 1990 I was ready to commit genocide against the afrikaners because of their nazi govt. To this day I still get hate from them. But I turn it round, and give them understanding even as they undermine everything in my life. I may still lose it, and wipe them out, but it will not be for lack of trying to do things the right way. I can only take so much evil, before I retaliate. Yes, I'm for making alcohol illegal. Bible says whoever drinks isn't wise. Everyone who has a the feeling of snapping must act right away to protect themselves. Bible says to remove yourself from the problem then you won't have the urge to snap anymore.
|
|
|
Post by jonbain on May 2, 2019 22:34:13 GMT
Meth effects the body in much the same way as diet pills, whether ephedrine or pseudo-ephedrine. Most effect of most drugs is a placebo effect. Are you campaigning for alcohol to be illegal? That kills more than a million people a year, which is more than all the illegal drugs, and prescription drugs put together. As for when people go psycho, if you think it cannot happen to you, I assure you that it can. Everybody has a limit on the amount of abuse they can suffer, and the no mind is immune to it. The surest way to push someone who is borderline over the edge is to reject and disrespect them. You talk to me, and in feb 1990 I was ready to commit genocide against the afrikaners because of their nazi govt. To this day I still get hate from them. But I turn it round, and give them understanding even as they undermine everything in my life. I may still lose it, and wipe them out, but it will not be for lack of trying to do things the right way. I can only take so much evil, before I retaliate. Yes, I'm for making alcohol illegal. Bible says whoever drinks isn't wise. Everyone who has a the feeling of snapping must act right away to protect themselves. Bible says to remove yourself from the problem then you won't have the urge to snap anymore. Motor cars kill as many as alcohol. Do you think all motor car factories should be forcibly closed? Not everyone has the capacity to remove themselves from such problems. Drunk drivers are fairly ubiquitous, and if you have ever tried immigration you will know that it is effectively slavery for most. Jumping from the frying pan into the fire is often the result of running away from such problems. Many decent Germans fled Germany prior to ww1, and all that did was made the problem worse for everyone. America tried to isolate herself from those problems in ww1 and early ww2, and ended up having an even worse problem later. If America had jumped in and stopped Hitler when the Germans crossed the Rhine or entered Czech territory, they would have prevented Hitler from multiplying his power over and over again. I do not blame Truman for Nuking the Japs either, sometimes there just is no alternative. I always try to have empathy for anyone who gets pushed into that dark part of their mind. There but for the grace of God, go you or I. As for the addicts, many people simply are in excessive pain, and heroin is the only remedy they have. Science acquired its medicines from antiquity, and those historical processes of growing poppies in Afghanistan are little different from those that grow them "legally" in Tasmania. It is really just white monopoly capital that uses violence to corner the market for its 'opioids' and morphine.
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on May 2, 2019 23:03:05 GMT
Yes, I'm for making alcohol illegal. Bible says whoever drinks isn't wise. Everyone who has a the feeling of snapping must act right away to protect themselves. Bible says to remove yourself from the problem then you won't have the urge to snap anymore. Motor cars kill as many as alcohol. Do you think all motor car factories should be forcibly closed? Not everyone has the capacity to remove themselves from such problems. Drunk drivers are fairly ubiquitous, and if you have ever tried immigration you will know that it is effectively slavery for most. Jumping from the frying pan into the fire is often the result of running away from such problems. Many decent Germans fled Germany prior to ww1, and all that did was made the problem worse for everyone. America tried to isolate herself from those problems in ww1 and early ww2, and ended up having an even worse problem later. If America had jumped in and stopped Hitler when the Germans crossed the Rhine or entered Czech territory, they would have prevented Hitler from multiplying his power over and over again. I do not blame Truman for Nuking the Japs either, sometimes there just is no alternative. I always try to have empathy for anyone who gets pushed into that dark part of their mind. There but for the grace of God, go you or I. As for the addicts, many people simply are in excessive pain, and heroin is the only remedy they have. Science acquired its medicines from antiquity, and those historical processes of growing poppies in Afghanistan are little different from those that grow them "legally" in Tasmania. It is really just white monopoly capital that uses violence to corner the market for its 'opioids' and morphine. Cars are technology. I have nothing against technology and neither does the bible unless you idolize technology. You can even be walking on the street and die from too much sun exposer as many have died especially in USA last year or so in being out in the sun too long so car wreck death isn't any different. Those things aren't designed to kill you or hurt you. But anything can still be used to hurt or kill you, even a pencil or a paper clip.
|
|
|
Post by jonbain on May 5, 2019 18:26:25 GMT
Motor cars kill as many as alcohol. Do you think all motor car factories should be forcibly closed? Not everyone has the capacity to remove themselves from such problems. Drunk drivers are fairly ubiquitous, and if you have ever tried immigration you will know that it is effectively slavery for most. Jumping from the frying pan into the fire is often the result of running away from such problems. Many decent Germans fled Germany prior to ww1, and all that did was made the problem worse for everyone. America tried to isolate herself from those problems in ww1 and early ww2, and ended up having an even worse problem later. If America had jumped in and stopped Hitler when the Germans crossed the Rhine or entered Czech territory, they would have prevented Hitler from multiplying his power over and over again. I do not blame Truman for Nuking the Japs either, sometimes there just is no alternative. I always try to have empathy for anyone who gets pushed into that dark part of their mind. There but for the grace of God, go you or I. As for the addicts, many people simply are in excessive pain, and heroin is the only remedy they have. Science acquired its medicines from antiquity, and those historical processes of growing poppies in Afghanistan are little different from those that grow them "legally" in Tasmania. It is really just white monopoly capital that uses violence to corner the market for its 'opioids' and morphine. Cars are technology. I have nothing against technology and neither does the bible unless you idolize technology. You can even be walking on the street and die from too much sun exposer as many have died especially in USA last year or so in being out in the sun too long so car wreck death isn't any different. Those things aren't designed to kill you or hurt you. But anything can still be used to hurt or kill you, even a pencil or a paper clip. Any car which has the capacity to go over 30mph only does so to boost the ego of its owner. It is effectively an idol, especially if its cost is excessive, which most often they are. Most of the auto-industry is simply profit at the expense of a million lives per year. And you are likely quite lucky that you have never been so depressed to require medication. So drugs are technology. Many people self-medicate as the cost and effectiveness of psychiatric care are normally prohibitive in places where it is most needed. As for alcohol, they tried the prohibition and started a violent gang-war, the effects of which are still with us today, as that is how the mob came into power. As I have pointed out, every illegal drug has a legal counterpart which has the exact same effect on the central nervous system. Only marijuana differs and has never killed anyone, whereas the alcohol monopoly is the chief instigator in keeping it illegal. Its difficult to describe the extent to which testosterone can put a man into a bezerker rage. And it is not coincidence, that it is the female marijuana plant that is so effective at neutralizing this. If you question that, just look at males of most mammals have this issue, so its not a psychological state, but a physiological one. It requires medication, and nature has provided the solution for men, but the war-mongers don't want men to be peaceful. They want cannon-fodder.
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on May 5, 2019 21:05:32 GMT
Cars are technology. I have nothing against technology and neither does the bible unless you idolize technology. You can even be walking on the street and die from too much sun exposer as many have died especially in USA last year or so in being out in the sun too long so car wreck death isn't any different. Those things aren't designed to kill you or hurt you. But anything can still be used to hurt or kill you, even a pencil or a paper clip. Any car which has the capacity to go over 30mph only does so to boost the ego of its owner. It is effectively an idol, especially if its cost is excessive, which most often they are. Most of the auto-industry is simply profit at the expense of a million lives per year. And you are likely quite lucky that you have never been so depressed to require medication. So drugs are technology. Many people self-medicate as the cost and effectiveness of psychiatric care are normally prohibitive in places where it is most needed. As for alcohol, they tried the prohibition and started a violent gang-war, the effects of which are still with us today, as that is how the mob came into power. As I have pointed out, every illegal drug has a legal counterpart which has the exact same effect on the central nervous system. Only marijuana differs and has never killed anyone, whereas the alcohol monopoly is the chief instigator in keeping it illegal. Its difficult to describe the extent to which testosterone can put a man into a bezerker rage. And it is not coincidence, that it is the female marijuana plant that is so effective at neutralizing this. If you question that, just look at males of most mammals have this issue, so its not a psychological state, but a physiological one. It requires medication, and nature has provided the solution for men, but the war-mongers don't want men to be peaceful. They want cannon-fodder. I wouldn't necessarily call it an ego thing. I am not a morning person so would rather get as much sleep possible and drive to work as fast as I can. I don't drive over 30mph because of my ego but to get to places faster to not be late or to not be stuck on the road forever. And an idol in scripture is only an object you set dedication to or "special" meaning. If we look at Daniel in scripture, he saw the statue idol but he didn't care to show all the dedication to it that people showed. He knew it served no purpose so he didn't bother with it. But tools like technology serve purpose. We use them to drive, build, cook, etc. Jesus was a carpenter so He used tools to build things. Jesus didn't give special dedication to those things because He didn't idolize them so we never hear of Him building any statues to kiss or pray to or anything. Objects are only meant to be used as tools and nothing more like a god that needed to ne kissed, bowed down to, etc. An object is just and object. It is only there to serve it's purpose then be thrown away or whatever. It's not something that must rule your life in any way. A phone isn't an idol but a tool unless it does serve more to you then just a simple tool. A cow is a good example. It's there for milk, food, and stuff. This is what we can use it for because it's what God made it for. However, some people in India idolize it. They will bow to it, stop dead im their tracks to let it cross even if it takes the cow forever. This is idolizing. It's showing special attention to something that doesn't need or deserve it. People in the US put their hands on their hearts, stand up to show honor, and talk to a piece of cloth/flag. I don't talk to objects nor see them that special to show such dedication to them. It's weird, a waste of my time, and quite creepy seeing people do it as if they're trying to raise something from the dead when it's not living.
|
|
|
Post by jonbain on May 22, 2019 23:20:03 GMT
Any car which has the capacity to go over 30mph only does so to boost the ego of its owner. It is effectively an idol, especially if its cost is excessive, which most often they are. Most of the auto-industry is simply profit at the expense of a million lives per year. And you are likely quite lucky that you have never been so depressed to require medication. So drugs are technology. Many people self-medicate as the cost and effectiveness of psychiatric care are normally prohibitive in places where it is most needed. As for alcohol, they tried the prohibition and started a violent gang-war, the effects of which are still with us today, as that is how the mob came into power. As I have pointed out, every illegal drug has a legal counterpart which has the exact same effect on the central nervous system. Only marijuana differs and has never killed anyone, whereas the alcohol monopoly is the chief instigator in keeping it illegal. Its difficult to describe the extent to which testosterone can put a man into a bezerker rage. And it is not coincidence, that it is the female marijuana plant that is so effective at neutralizing this. If you question that, just look at males of most mammals have this issue, so its not a psychological state, but a physiological one. It requires medication, and nature has provided the solution for men, but the war-mongers don't want men to be peaceful. They want cannon-fodder. I wouldn't necessarily call it an ego thing. I am not a morning person so would rather get as much sleep possible and drive to work as fast as I can. I don't drive over 30mph because of my ego but to get to places faster to not be late or to not be stuck on the road forever. And an idol in scripture is only an object you set dedication to or "special" meaning. If we look at Daniel in scripture, he saw the statue idol but he didn't care to show all the dedication to it that people showed. He knew it served no purpose so he didn't bother with it. But tools like technology serve purpose. We use them to drive, build, cook, etc. Jesus was a carpenter so He used tools to build things. Jesus didn't give special dedication to those things because He didn't idolize them so we never hear of Him building any statues to kiss or pray to or anything. Objects are only meant to be used as tools and nothing more like a god that needed to ne kissed, bowed down to, etc. An object is just and object. It is only there to serve it's purpose then be thrown away or whatever. It's not something that must rule your life in any way. A phone isn't an idol but a tool unless it does serve more to you then just a simple tool. A cow is a good example. It's there for milk, food, and stuff. This is what we can use it for because it's what God made it for. However, some people in India idolize it. They will bow to it, stop dead im their tracks to let it cross even if it takes the cow forever. This is idolizing. It's showing special attention to something that doesn't need or deserve it. People in the US put their hands on their hearts, stand up to show honor, and talk to a piece of cloth/flag. I don't talk to objects nor see them that special to show such dedication to them. It's weird, a waste of my time, and quite creepy seeing people do it as if they're trying to raise something from the dead when it's not living. Well, I think most westerners care as much for their cars, phones and flags as Hindus do for their cows. But it served a purpose to likely prevent the eating of the source of milk to make cows sacred at times when communication was difficult across what has always been the densest populated part of Earth.
|
|