| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Rortykiller
Forum Leader
Joined: 15 Jul 2008
Posts: 740
Local time: 2:51 AM
|
 Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 5:45 am Post subject: |
  |
|
This is your own fault. There is no such thing as being allowed to do something.
For example: I was in a class one day discussing atheism against my will (provoked intensely by stupidity). Someone tried to say I was an agnostic. I said "Agnostics are pussies". Suddenly it was hands across America for these agnostics. They're so noble and unbiased and open minded.... blah blah blah.
But I didn't let the mob seize the class. I explained myself fervently. And by the end I was able to convince a few people that Agnostics were hardly open minded.
But here you are complaining about your rights being trampled because you had unfavorable views, yet it sounds like you let them win. If you want people to respect you, it has to be demanded. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
|
chookrooter
Forum Master
Joined: 07 Jun 2008
Posts: 2270
Local time: 5:21 PM
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 19, 2008 2:22 am Post subject: Re: What about my non religious rights? |
|
|
| Aridiris wrote: | | Sea of red wrote: | | Because it's perfectly okay for someone to make fun of Islam,Buddhism,Paganism,Judaism or whatever.But should you make fun of Christianity,you'll be burned at the stake. |
A lot of Christians believe it's the opposite. |
A lot of Christians are also fucking morons.
Note to didacts; did I do that proper? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Paulheys
Legendary dark
Joined: 05 Jul 2008
Posts: 220
Local time: 2:51 AM
Location: Uk
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 20, 2008 2:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Seaofred just ignore dawkadoodoo and stop being so insulting yourself.
_________________
God made me an atheist. Who are you to argue with his will? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dragonfire
Intern
Joined: 09 Jul 2008
Posts: 44
Local time: 2:51 AM
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 20, 2008 2:54 pm Post subject: Re: What about my non religious rights? |
|
|
| Paulheys wrote: | | If I insult god or jesus or muhammed or whoever I can be punished for it. Mention Jesus and everyone jumps in to defend him and a boss/teacher whatever will say 'you have to respect religous rights' so why can't they respect my non religious rights? Why don't I recieve the same protection for saying I don't belive in god and if people preach why can I say 'you're disrespecting my views' and why aren't they told to respect my non religion? |
i agree very much so they should be respect on both sides and an equal amount of respect. If one wishes for respect they must respect others. I think one is entitled to be religious or non religious as long at is not detrimental and they should respect you beliefs as well. It is as offesive for them not to take your beliefs into consideration. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sea of red
Forum Leader
Joined: 03 Jul 2008
Posts: 774
Local time: 2:51 AM
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 20, 2008 3:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Paulheys wrote: | | Seaofred just ignore dawkadoodoo and stop being so insulting yourself. |
Dude this threads been dead for like a week.
Dawk doesn't show respect when he replies to people.Which is why I responded in the manner I did. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chookrooter
Forum Master
Joined: 07 Jun 2008
Posts: 2270
Local time: 5:21 PM
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 20, 2008 6:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sea of red wrote: | | Paulheys wrote: | | Seaofred just ignore dawkadoodoo and stop being so insulting yourself. |
Dude this threads been dead for like a week.
Dawk doesn't show respect when he replies to people.Which is why I responded in the manner I did. |
CR: Good point; if he's insulted you. Other people are perfectly capable of looking after themselves. So far I haven't noticed if he starts or replies to insults.
I haven't had a cross word with Dawk since I've been here. Well to be honest, I've had no words with him at all. Neither have I attacked him,even though I don't always agree with his point of view---However, I think he makes sense a lot of the time once you filter out the provocative manner.
A troll? I think it depends on the intent If its' simply to get an emotional response,then yes. If however ,it's a just a contrarian with limited empathy skills being himself,then no.
Oh, imo,tit-for-tat and payback, although very human, (I do it all the time) are morally weak positions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dawkadoodle
Forum Master
Joined: 03 Feb 2008
Posts: 2230
Local time: 2:51 AM
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 21, 2008 12:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| chookrooter wrote: | | Sea of red wrote: | | Paulheys wrote: | | Seaofred just ignore dawkadoodoo and stop being so insulting yourself. |
Dude this threads been dead for like a week.
Dawk doesn't show respect when he replies to people.Which is why I responded in the manner I did. |
CR: Good point; if he's insulted you. Other people are perfectly capable of looking after themselves. So far I haven't noticed if he starts or replies to insults.
I haven't had a cross word with Dawk since I've been here. Well to be honest, I've had no words with him at all. Neither have I attacked him,even though I don't always agree with his point of view---However, I think he makes sense a lot of the time once you filter out the provocative manner.
A troll? I think it depends on the intent If its' simply to get an emotional response,then yes. If however ,it's a just a contrarian with limited empathy skills being himself,then no.
Oh, imo,tit-for-tat and payback, although very human, (I do it all the time) are morally weak positions. |
People often mistake my sarcasm and criticisms as an affront against their internet handle or character. You however, tend to look deeper into my comments than the average person so you realise a few things others may not.
Empathising with someone is pretending to know their feelings and pitying them, that's a disgrace to both people. People won't grow stronger in mind or character if with make believe comfort. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chookrooter
Forum Master
Joined: 07 Jun 2008
Posts: 2270
Local time: 5:21 PM
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 22, 2008 8:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Empathising with someone is pretending to know their feelings and pitying them, that's a disgrace to both people. People won't grow stronger in mind or character if with make believe comfort. |
I think we may have a different understanding of the term "empathy". When I was was being trained as a counselor,I was taught that empathy is being aware of what a person is feeling. It is not be be conflated with caring nor indeed comforting another per se.
In the context of counseling,empathy is a tool .The person is confronted with their feelings and challenged to deal with them.
Few people are aware of exactly what they are feeling at any given moment. Most of us disguise our emotions. Crudely; a man expresses fear and sadness as anger. A woman expresses anger as sadness.
Sympathy is often self indulgent maudlin sentiment,and not related to caring. Not a useless emotion,as it allows the sympathiser to feel better.It can have a positive effect. Sentiment is often used to get people to part with money for a genuine good cause. (imo) That starving child does not care WHY someone gave money.
In a social setting, empathy is simply being aware of what another person may be feeling. It entails being aware of the probable results of our actions. Ironically, a troll is acutely aware of the likely reactions of others.The pay off is attention.
Like all common human behaviour,empathy has a survival value. In this case socially and literally.In our society, an adult lacking empathy and conscience is labeled "psychotic"
Do I look more deeply at your posts than others? I doubt it. Perhaps I'm a little more objective because (1) you haven't yet insulted me and (2) this is an internet forum. I don't know you. I'm interested in your opinions,but have no emotional investment, yet.
Whenever I become emotionally upset on a forum, I simply leave. That usually happens after about a year,sometimes less. My record is 14 months.
I feel no responsibility for the emotional or intellectual growth of others. If I'm a know-it-all, rude, sarcastic,intolerant, arrogant,pompous etc etc, that's because I'm a nasty misanthropic old fart. I 'm not the teensiest bit interested in teaching anyone anything. I'm here to have some fun, keep on my toes mentally,and perhaps learn something. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hit_me_up024
Forum Master
Joined: 25 Dec 2007
Posts: 2392
Local time: 2:51 AM
Location: My parents basement.
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 22, 2008 8:35 pm Post subject: Re: What about my non religious rights? |
|
|
| Paulheys wrote: | | If I insult god or jesus or muhammed or whoever I can be punished for it. Mention Jesus and everyone jumps in to defend him and a boss/teacher whatever will say 'you have to respect religous rights' so why can't they respect my non religious rights? Why don't I recieve the same protection for saying I don't belive in god and if people preach why can I say 'you're disrespecting my views' and why aren't they told to respect my non religion? |
you are very young arent you? the reason i say this, is because the way you look at this situation. And the way you dealt with this one......
http://www.atheistforums.com/asked-to-pray-for-someone-s-kid-t8693.html
the point being that religion is something that should not be discussed at work. Whether its good or bad someones feelings are going to end up hurt, and thats your co-worker you have to see everyday. So just dont discuss it and when people do realize that they dont really think about what they say, and thats not someone i want to be.
_________________
I know the game is crazy it's mo' crazy than it's ever been. I'm married to that crazy BITCH call me kevin federline.
Props to Enemy_of_Reality |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dawkadoodle
Forum Master
Joined: 03 Feb 2008
Posts: 2230
Local time: 2:51 AM
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 9:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| chookrooter wrote: |
I think we may have a different understanding of the term "empathy". When I was was being trained as a counselor,I was taught that empathy is being aware of what a person is feeling. It is not be be conflated with caring nor indeed comforting another per se. |
It is both being aware, being sensitive or having the capacity to understand the state of a person's emotional or mental state (feelings, thoughts, etc) despite having no experience with what ever the person is afflicted with. However, true empathy isn't possible as one can never truly comprehend or place oneself in the mentality of another person. Thus, empathy exists as an idealisation of several different concepts.
| chookrooter wrote: | | (imo) That starving child does not care WHY someone gave money. |
I don't think we can speak on behalf of the child, regardless of your opinion.
| chookrooter wrote: | | In a social setting, empathy is simply being aware of what another person may be feeling. It entails being aware of the probable results of our actions. Ironically, a troll is acutely aware of the likely reactions of others.The pay off is attention. |
In a social setting its far more than being aware, it's moves not only the direction of your actions and words, but your tone and other elements. If one begins to empathize with another, chances are they're usual attitude or mentality won't be as prominent or they'll emphasize more fitting and relevant emotions and actions. Just being aware is not empathy, given the common view that is often both being aware and being sensitive to as well, in the common social context.
Secondly, a troll is a subjective slur that has no real, objective definition. Looking at different humour dictionary sites will show that basically, "troll" can be anything a person doesn't like. It's a childish term with a large variance of connotations. If someone is that aware of such, they are simply that aware.
| chookrooter wrote: | | Like all common human behaviour,empathy has a survival value. In this case socially and literally.In our society, an adult lacking empathy and conscience is labeled "psychotic" |
Someone who is psychotic is someone whose person can no longer identify reality from fiction. They suffer from delusions or hallucinations and are unable to differ from their visions and the reality which surrounds them.
A lack of empathy along with the lack of a conscience (ignoring social order, etc) would mean the person shows the signs of being a sociopath more than being psychotic.
| chookrooter wrote: | | Do I look more deeply at your posts than others? I doubt it. Perhaps I'm a little more objective because (1) you haven't yet insulted me and (2) this is an internet forum. I don't know you. I'm interested in your opinions,but have no emotional investment, yet. |
Emotional investment is irrelevant here, you don't need it to look deeper into someones post. Most of the time it's done unknowingly, simply because one doesn't have a bias or one is interested, such as you. My posts are usually layered, those who become irate or provoked are usually the ones who only read the surface. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chookrooter
Forum Master
Joined: 07 Jun 2008
Posts: 2270
Local time: 5:21 PM
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 24, 2008 9:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
@Dawk; Thank you for a thoughtful reply.
I agree that it's not possible to ever "know"another person.
However,I feel that way about knowledge generally.
Implicit in my world view is that the knowledge I use to live is a collection of working hypotheses.
When I speak of "empathy"I mean it in a fairly crude sense, which is nevertheless helpful in living as a social being.
My moral values are ideals. So far,I have managed to consistently keep only the major ones,mostly those which get you put in prison. (although I've never committed adultery)
I think you're right about what a starving child might think. Although I think my opinion is reasonable enough,I have no way of knowing for sure. That suggests to me that I'm probably wrong. I guess a bit like the expectation of gratitude from recipients of one's charity.
We may need to disagree about emotion.My position is that a human is a sentient, but primarily emotional animal. I assert that in any struggle between emotion and reason,emotion usually wins.
I believe emotion,not rationality is our default autonomic response. It can be overcome, but I believe it's far rarer than we like to admit as individuals. Large groups of humans acting together rarely use reason. I think emotionalism (and testosterone) is how politicians get our gormless young men to go to other countries to kill their gormless young men.
(Edit: typos:I can't type for toffee)
My perception is that when people here attack you it is because they feel threatened. There is no rational reason to insult you.--Nor for you to insult them.
I've qualified what I've said here because it's only my opinion. Implicit in my opinion is always the possibility of error.
Very happy to discuss just about anything with you,so long as we are able to maintain mutual respect. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Live Video and Chat Room
Freethought Videos
FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Register
