'Intellectual' Fight Picking

[Cocobanana]

From my experience, I've been more willing to look back on a potentially faulty personal philosophy when presented with information in a fair manner by someone who lives in an admirable fashion. If they act like they have all the answers they need, and believe so much in helping others become a better version of themselves, the least I can do is be open to what they have to say.

In contrast, if I make a comment that ends up being underdeveloped (to put it nicely), and an individual or group are quick to chastise me for being such an idiot, my hackles rise and I am more likely to feel that these 'haters' don't have any answers worth appreciating. Why would someone who was more sure of themselves respond in so cruel of a fashion, after all?

This isn't to say the latter camp is always wrong, or the former camp is always right (just look at all the door-to-door missionaries who seem so nice while they try to brainwash you, or the hardcore feminists who rightfully highlight the continued unfair treatment of women... yet who are using extreme methods of doing so) but if the most enlightened of us hope to bring positive change to the world and have people listen, more patience seems to be the best avenue.

To put all of this into context, I spent most of my life raised in a Christian environment. Seeing media that was anti-Christian only made me feel more defensive, that I was in the right and all these other people were just jealous because they didn't feel comfortable with accepting God. Later on, I sought out the history of popular religions on my own, and had more even-toned conversations with Atheists and Agnostics, and that is what helped to put me on what feels like a better path. First I went to Atheism, and started making the same mistake of cruelly joking about how stupid Christians are, because I felt ashamed of how dumb I had looked when in their shoes. Thinking about the religion thing from a more scientific perspective, I realized the only feasible option is Agnosticism, since nothing in life is 100 percent and that can include whether or not intelligent life exists outside of our world or even the observable universe (yet it is unlikely that if so powerful of a God exists to create everything, he/she/they/it would be understandable by humans).

Still, I would have loved to be in this head space at a younger age, so now that I'm 25 I could be pondering even loftier issues than religious (or lack thereof) identity.

Are you one, or do you know another, who bullies or gets bullied based on condescension? Why does it seem so difficult to hold back the snark and offer some even-handed information about life observations? If we meet someone who has a religion/political party/philosophy different from ours, why not attempt to teach instead of assuming the other person is too stupid and will never change and blah blah blah (even though life is ALWAYS changing so it seems strange not to give the benefit of the doubt)?

 

[WolfNightV4X1]

I tend to avoid arguments to begin with because I hate how condescending people can get that my views are 'stupid'

If people weren't so hostile in 'discussions' then I might consider it but it's usually human nature to be that way

 

[Distorted]

I'm not very good at debating and arguing with others myself. I'm always open to hear whatever, but more often than not the other person isn't very open to my stances. I get that mostly from my family who's too stubborn to hear me out plainly. They always wind up yelling or disagreeing harshly. Even most of my friends don't like to listen mostly because they just don't listen or understand. Most everyone just tells what they want and that's all. I've learned to keep my ideas to myself as a result.

Rarely do I find the person that would entertain my thoughts and exchange ideas with me fairly. Which is why I spoke to a therapist for as long as I did. It gets to a point where you feel starved for some kind of mental stimulation and you wind up coming on to forums....like this.

 

[Mr. Sparta]

People simply get offended too often.

Seriously, my very existence on this earth could somehow offend somebody, let alone what I say. Talking to someone can be like defusing a bomb sometimes. This is why I stay nonverbal unless I am dead certain that whoever I'm talking to has complete comfort in talking to me and listening to what I need to say.

I don't know if this adds to anything at all, but it's said.

 

[Cocobanana]

People simply get offended too often.

Seriously, my very existence on this earth could somehow offend somebody, let alone what I say. Talking to someone can be like defusing a bomb sometimes. This is why I stay nonverbal unless I am dead certain that whoever I'm talking to has complete comfort in talking to me and listening to what I need to say.

I don't know if this adds to anything at all, but it's said.

Your post adds because you are sharing your opinion. It can be a struggle to stay open-minded with a person whose beliefs are different than yours, especially if what they're saying is challenging your happy place. Even if someone does get offended by your mere existence, maybe you could challenge them to figure out why and maybe they'll think better of their hate?

 

[BRN]

It's not you, it's evolutionary.

Studies show that people are more likely to believe someone they see as "emotionally sincere" than they are to believe someone who is "logically coherent". We're animals, even though we're the only species with a highly developed language; pack mentality and simple mechanisms still float around in our heads.

It's admirable to rise above those feelings and, despite however anyone else may act, to view everything you hear with a rational ear. You don't have to pick a fight -- you can simply let people you believe are wrong slide -- but knowing when to ask to evidence and when to believe or disbelieve someone CAN become a rational skill, if you're willing to train yourself to not consider your emotions.

I'm not saying your hackles won't rise when people are cunts, but I'm saying that even cunts can be telling the truth, and despite how you feel about them, learning to separate your rational thoughts from your emotional baggage will pay dividends forever.

 

[Demensa]

If we meet someone who has a religion/political party/philosophy different from ours, why not attempt to teach instead of assuming the other person is too stupid and will never change and blah blah blah (even though life is ALWAYS changing so it seems strange not to give the benefit of the doubt)?

Most of the time, the perceived potential benefit of bringing up a conversation/debate is outweighed by the drawbacks. If you're in a position with a friend where you can discuss things with a level head, it's intellectually stimulating. But in most other cases challenging people's religious beliefs seems out of place, or requires too much effort, or seems likely to just make people upset because they think that you're coming at them with a "Your beliefs are wrong, mine are right: YOU SUCK" mindset.

In avoiding such conversations I don't mean to say that the other person is too stupid and will never change, it's just not worth the effort unless the right conditions are met.

 

[GreenNonic]

I do not type very well, and i am reminded by this fact almost daily on youtube and other places i try and interact with other human beings, i do not spell well, i do not punctuate well, i am unsure how paragraphs work, so i make large ones, people assume i am stupid because i type badly, but really I'm smart. because of my autism, i do not relate to other people very often, unless they are feeling the same as me, or agree with something i feel or say or do, i am unable to connect socially with said person, i have problems starting a conversation, and ending one, i also fail to understand how to maintain a conversation that has been started with me by someone else. Generally someone will speak to me, and if i did not see them approaching me soon enough to flee from them, i will attempt to speak to them, though mostly i can only answer question they ask, and when they run out of things to ask ("How are you, whats your name, where you from, how old are you,etc") i stop talking , and it makes people unsure what to do with me next. this is not just a problem with new people, i am like this even with people i have known for years, and family i have known all my life., so anyways my point is i always feel bullied, normal social behavior is a language i can not learn or understand, and whats worse is..no one else really knows or understand my language either. people complain about how i type all the time, people with autism often have bad memory problems, i can be told how to spell something right, and then not spell it right again, I've also been known to spell one word 2 or 3 different incorrect ways (Tomarrow,Tomarow,Tommarow is one i often do wrongly.) i think it has to do with change, people with autism do not like change of any kind, it can be traumatic, to the point where if i am watching a TV show and they make a drastic cast change, or someone dies in the series i am unable to watch the rest of it, ever.(when Daniel left in stargate comes to mind) so..since i have always typed this way i think i am unable to stop. as for god, i do not believe a being with such powers would bother itself with human beings, i never understood even as a 6 year old child why god would care or need anything from us, for something to be so important, god would cause half of us to burn in hell for eternity if we did not love him. why would god create such a flawed design as a human being, there is at least a million other forms he could have chosen , all of which much better and more efficient then a human being. and if god made us in his image, of all the shapes or materials a god could be shaped in/of , i find a human one utterly silly to pick. at the same time, i do not have the answers, so when i die I'll find out, i guess. if god is real, i do not think god is anything like what we think he is like. i've actually read the bible, because i was bored one week, god seems a lot like a human being, he does a lot of silly things, he wants love and affection, to rule, and control,submission if you disagree with any of them, he kills you in fits of rage, that can be localized to a city or country , but at least once, involved the destruction of the entire world. so reading the bible actually made my faith in god worse, i think that is why most pastors only pick and choose relivent content from said bible during sermons, speaking of the bible i find it weird that people put such faith in a book when they have no idea about it, it's not even whole parts are missing, when they found the scrolls some of them were damaged beyond reading, clearly you can not trust the church to have translated the bible word for word without changing or omitting anything, with the background and history of corruption they have. and even if they did, as mentioned before, parts of it are missing/unreadable.

And then there is women, how Christianity treats women is ultimately why i chose not to agree with them, for a all powerful being to create life, both male and female, and then give the female the ability to grow an entire person inside herself, birth it, and then feed it, and then to turn around and tell that woman she is not equal to a man seems weird to me, i am a man, i can not create a life inside my body, birth it, and feed it. men have such a small part in creating a life. so yea, i just could not subscribe to that nonsense. the ten commandments, nonsense! in the bible the very first thing that happened after god wrote them, was the guy got to the bottom of the mountain, and saw the people worshiping the golden calf, he smashed the commandments, and orders his loyal soldiers to slaughter everyone worshiping the golden calf. thou shalt not kill, god felt this time it was justified because they were in the wrong, but to me, a commandment from a super being is a commandment, and not just thou shalt not kill:unless whomever you murder is directly ignoring what i say". it's nonsense,imo

now that i have said so much, i must admit it is very odd for every race and culture to have a history of god, or gods, most of them with the same basic principles in the end it doesn't really matter if there is a god, i do not believe he created me just to worship him and that if i do not he will kill me, i believe a being with the power to create the universe would have more intelligence then that.

 

[Fallowfox]

GreenNonic, I read as far as 'I don't know how paragraphs work'. Not everyone will conclude you're stupid, but very few of us will have the patience to read a monolith of text. Either make short comments or learn how to use paragraphs correctly. Make a new paragraph every time you change the topic you're talking about, at least.

Like everyone else I'm more receptive to relaxed commentary, finding aggression difficult to process. I find snarky discourse easiest to process in scientific discussions, and even enjoy it sometimes, but when people are snarky about issues with very little tangibility that's much more trialing.

Also, I'm afraid I have to point out that the OP exhibits a skewed understanding of science. Your version of the scientific method does not include a null hypothesis or make effective use of the burden of proof, which lends artificial credence to any positive claim, even if it is inconsistent with what is already known. You further incorrectly associate using a null hypothesis with being spiteful, I feel.

 

[alphakitsune]

Oh man. This is bringing up bad memories of when I was 11. When I was 11 I was like an extremist. I would refuse to say the pledge of allegiance because I thought it was like praying to an idol. And I thought evolution was bullshit because I figured out what evolution was in 2nd grade and I thought it was cool that an animal could change into another animal over time. And my dad got sick of it and he told me that evolution was bullshit and ungodly. And that Darwin confessed that everything he said was a lie. And he found human bones with dinosaur bones and that there were dinosaurs on Noah's ark. For the next few years I was very confused and had extremely fundamentalist views.

 

[Demensa]

Also, I'm afraid I have to point out that the OP exhibits a skewed understanding of science. Your version of the scientific method does not include a null hypothesis or make effective use of the burden of proof, which lends artificial credence to any positive claim, even if it is inconsistent with what is already known. You further incorrectly associate using a null hypothesis with being spiteful, I feel.

Yeah, I think it's just a mix-up between "scientific" and "skeptical". (NB; skeptical in the philosophical sense!)

 

[Cocobanana]

Also, I'm afraid I have to point out that the OP exhibits a skewed understanding of science. Your version of the scientific method does not include a null hypothesis or make effective use of the burden of proof, which lends artificial credence to any positive claim, even if it is inconsistent with what is already known. You further incorrectly associate using a null hypothesis with being spiteful, I feel.

Are you referring to the part where I offer my reasons for being Agnostic? I understand that there is no way to prove any God is real right now, especially not the ones that are currently worshiped. At the same time, I can't feel 100 percent secure in saying that there is absolutely no ultimate life force out there... but you're right there is yet to be a hypothesis concerning a 'higher power' that holds even the slightest merit. I'm only saying that if there was something out there I am flexible and wouldn't stubbornly continue to say it was a lie just because I was used to the idea of living without worship, in the same way that if any part of my life was questioned with a better way to live I would be open to correcting my path and accepting the new information.