A question about opinion

[whiteypoker]

Well I suppose you all will get to see a part of my private life. I'll keep this short, as I want this exchange to stand on its own merrit without my bias altering the event.

I dealt with Silver's post that dealt with me over the personal medium of a private message because I felt that the thread may shut down. Due to its personal nature I thought that the mods would see it as a type of flaming, which when I respond to a person, they often do. In order to keep the thread moving I kept my thoughts between the two of us, however, the second party, silver, wishes for it to come public.

I now offer our exchange with the hopes that the mods will understand that this was once a private matter between silver and me, and that he wishes it to be in the public domain.

My message :

I'm going to be nice and walk you through this.

We'll start with the misrepresentation part:

"Whitey, misinterpretation is the bane of a debater's existence. I do not appreciate your implication that I'm "inept", and that I'm bluffing, somehow. I fail to see where I did not make a point."
-You did in fact make a point and if you drew from my argument that you didn't make a point, then you need to learn from your own quote.
-I implied your bluffing because you implied that I was bluffing by means of intimidation. Intimidation, under your model, leads to a party backing out of the argument because they feel inferior, and thus never test the theories of the topic. Shadokastur and I were obviously not in this type of relationship as he had responded to me more than once.
"I'm sorry that shadokastur's withdrawing (I try not to induce those sorts of things. Aoplogies that I came across in such a way)
-To me this appears as though you used this technique yourself
"Using examples is a valid way of calling attention to something - after all, if everyone had to start at the beginning, deducing the theories that were applicable to the example, and then using the example - conversation, and debate, would get nowhere. Instead, we say, "Oh, that's an example of X" and the necessary theory is implied."
-Using examples is a vaild way of calling attention to something, although to say that an example proves the necessary theory is nothing but a falicy. For example (i'll use your method) If I were to say, "It is unethical to time travel because it affects people's fate adversely. For example if I went back and picked the winning lottery numbers, and thereby stole the winnings from the person who should have won it, I have affected their fate." Not only must you discuss the ethics of affecting individual liberty, but you must discuss fates existance, why individual liberty is necessary to preserve, what other schools of ethical ponderings think and so forth. An example implies nothing about the validity of the theories involved. They only imply the necessity. Do you understand now why shadokastur and I took a "devience from the topic" as you called it. Though it appeared to you that, "You guys are dragging this off-topic, even though it appears you're still discussing the same thing. The matter of logical mind and emotional mind are ultimately irrelevant," it really was relevant.
"So, in a very Ha, ha, only Serious way, quit your alpha-male posturing and answer my question. (You see, you've annoyed me. Because you're too busy establishing dominance - this results in my logical (and emotional) frustration that you're ultimately using my question for your own self-serving ends, instead of providing knowledge to the group as a whole. So I've lashed out personally as an attempt to shock you back into a more productive mindset."
-I believe you'll find plenty of comment over that quote in one of my earlier posts, but remember, keep an open mind. Isn't this, by the way, what your wrote your thread over? Couldn't then, I say that you answered your own question, and therefore wasted the time of those who posted answers because you knew the answer yourself? Couldn't I also say that by berating me and falsely accusing me of establishing dominance, which I assure you I obviously, given your response to legitimate debate, do not have to do for you, that you are using your own thread for you self serving, egocentric needs? At least its an interesting thought.
"I didn't mind it when you were arguing things in the context of the question I asked, but when you started debating those things outside the context, it became superfluous to the topic's design. It's still valid debate, but it should probably be discussed in a separate context."
-I appreciate your blessing. Yet another example of you presenting a dominating role when legitimate contributions to a debate are outside your grasp.
"I did not ask the mods to do anything. I merely noted that the path that involves intimidation as a regular feature is very likely to cause things to unravel, and thus bring their attention."
-My theory here is similar to yours in a way. Your points are unfounded and seem a little disstressed. I believe you felt intimidated and therefore answered the best you could. I don't blame you for this other than your false accusations on the end of Grailik and me. The person you most likely thought I was intimidating left because of your comment. I understand that you must present a larger than life scenario because you feel little. I appologize if the source of that belittleing has come from me, though i doubt it has.
"After all, it is "English Professors" who attach the meanings to the symbols that you use to debate right and wrong. They are "Thinkers" as well, and they are no less occupied in discussing right and wrong - they have to create the words and meanings of those words. You are dependent on them to get your ideas across."
-A great example of a distressed comment, possibly arriving from the feeling of ineptness. Do you believe that language was created by english professors? Or for that matter, English was created by English professors? My dear child, language is often created by culture, not English professors. They discuss the "right and wrong" in the context of interpritation. "Thinkers" determine right and wrong in the context of life and logical laws. So no, I don't owe English Professors any more than I owe my parents or the English speaking nations.
"People get hot about these topics when they feel intimidated by someone, that somehow their intelligence is being insulted or their free range to explore ideas is being restricted."
-Umm...by limiting and ultimatley destroying Shadokastur's and my conversation, haven't you, obvious knowingly, given the situation for flaming to occur. Tell me this, are you trying to start a flaming war? If so, then why? Why post a thread over getting out of hand, and then knowingly create the situation for people to get out of hand? Were conducting an experiment? I commend you on that but be aware that you crossed some ethical standards in the process.

I really hate that I had to, as you will probably see it, bag on you over so much material. You must realize though, if you're going to throw out crap, and thats not a judgement merely observation, then expect those of us who you consider over masculine alpha males to prove you wrong. I will not be intimidated by you or your inabilities to debate. I will continue in my persistant destruction of your ill-found ideas because I have been trained to think. I simply cannot, its in my nature, allow you to make comments about me or my friends with such shaky logic and reasoning. I think you have valid points, although I also believe that they are self reflective; a window into you, not me or the other debators.

Keep killing whitey

His response:

If you should choose to make these comments public, I will consider them and give them response.

Until then, however, I consider them the whining of a child. You should be ashamed of discraging yourself so.


I have not altered our exchange in any way. I'm not sure why he wanted it out in public, but I guess it could be useful to the thread. Feel free to to pm me with comments and questions, or simply post replies. I welcome all forms of critisism both constructive and otherwise. You won't hurt my feelings so don't be shy. Talking things out is how we've made it this far in history. Why stop now.


If God would have intended us to do philosophy, he would have created us

[Therin]

[Graillik Tur]

Well as I discussed this exact topic with my father today I learned 2 things. A) my father is a lot more intelligent on the workings of the human mind than I thought. and B) he made this statement.

"When intereing into an argument most people already believe that you are wrong and they are right. One could even go so far as to say 'I agree with what your saying, I just don't like the way you said it'. In order to get anything out of the exchange both parties have to agree that perhaps they can be wrong. In other words the persons involved have to be there in order to learn, not just to argue."

With this said, what we have seen here is a mixture of ideological exchange, and arguing. Arguing is a bi-product of both parties believing that both of them are completely right. No matter what the statements made, neither will be swayed. I am no begging and pleading with everyone from PO. Please bring me something that will make me have to stop and think or otherwise be ready for me to teach you something. That's all I really want.

Salut.

PS Check out the Debate Theory forums for updates on how to beat me at my own game.

[GAAZ]

[Excel Zero]

I don't feel picked on at all, but then that leads me to a question.

I am very experienced and learned in three big topics. The military (Well the Air Force), Medicine, and Horses.

So if that is true does that mean someone who maybe has a friend with a disease, let's say Diabetes, has a lesser opinion than myself who has treated diabetes like 50 times in three years?

Or better perhaps, does the rest of the world have a lesser opinion about the Air Force than Terin and I because we've been in three years and know the inner workings of it?

Honestly, I don't believe so. I think it's unfair to say that one's opinions are lesser just because of training. Just in the way that I don't believe anyone is smarter than anyone else.

Kiyo and I are a perfect example. We've both taken IQ tests and I happen to lie in a fairly high area and to me that means nothing. Knowing that little 3 digit number means nothing to me. Knowing that i have a certificate that says I have earned a degree in college doesn't mean much except that now I can do the job I want.

In my personal opinion I think the reason people get so hot on these topics is because of ego. Someone telling someone their opinions are lesser because of a lesser education is wrong. There is also life experience. As much as I would've hated to say this aloud, my parents know more about life than I do because they have experienced it longer, yet my ather never had a degree beyond high school.

but anyway, I am pretty happy to see how well this has gone so far. Even GAAZ who picks on me for no reason is cordgial. heh heh :-p

Good day ya'll!

Excel

[Silver Adept]

[Girkon]

If you agree to disagree an understanding can be made. At least then the heads won't be bitten off or anything ¬.¬

[Graillik Tur]

Then what would be the point of philosophy, religions, politics, games, or even thought?

[Girkon]

Oh I wouldn't wanna rag on all that. i'm just saying if people could try to understand without getting all violent trying to point fingers and eventually lose the whole meaning of it all. It's not fun if people get so down in the dumps all the time.

[shadokastur]

Ok. I'll return to this topic to at least clear things up on my side.

A) Nobody chased me off. I chose to leave for a couple of reasons. The first being that Adept found where the conversation had gone was too far away from his original inquiry and I can see his point. I suppose my points could've been a little more concise and better worded but, when in the formulation process, I often find myself greatly frustrated with my inability to express the concepts I've learned/experienced with words. I'm sure I'm not alone in this. The second reason is that since Adept had started this topic I felt that he should be given the respect of a homeowner in his/her home, the "my house my rules." concept, one that I'm sure most of us are very familiar with just out of respect. And I too thought that this topic was targeted for shutdown with the direction it was headed.

B) Whitey, you have a terrible habit of making condescending comments which only serve to anger their recipients. If this is a "blind your opponent with their own anger/passion" tactic then it is unappreciated and NOT conducive to a REAL debate. I've also seen you make intentional spelling and grammatical errors with the purpose of making Adept mad, thereby employing the same tactic. Once again, not helping to keep this a flame-free environment. I HAD submitted myself to be considered for a Mod position on this board but after realizing what effect your comments were having on me at the time, recipient or not, I withdrew my request and will now spend some time distancing myself from my own arguements. If I had been a Mod I'm afraid that after the post wherein you expounded your love for bunnies I would have skipped the warning and just locked this topic down. So for these two reasons I see that I'm unfit.

C) I must admit that I don't give most college graduates their due, at least for making it through the process. But, sadly, I've met an abundance of people who went to college just because their parents told them it was necessary and wound up spending four years of their parents money on staring at either their teacher or the blackboard and retaining or understanding nothing. I was already listening to you, Mr. Poker, with respect and an acute attention for the concepts behind your statements but as soon as you felt it necessary to establish your credentials, whether it was your need to be recognized for this as an accomplishment or your use of it in an attempt to establish a position of authority it destroyed my faith in your stances because, to me, it seemed more like a defense than a statement. Now that I've realized that this occured I can put it behind me and hopefully we can resume our exchange peacefully.

D) My theories are incomplete at best and it's entirely possible that they are, at their core, wrong. But it is with these theorys that I've made the progress that I have. I say it is, in my theory, possible to experience emotion in it's pure form if it is singled-out as a system of the process. Thought and emotion must be realized as complimental gears in the whole machine and not it's totality. I also believe that thought is engaged (put into motion) by emotion (our animal roots) and is propagated by the scenarios that thought creates out of an effort to solve the "problem" of negative emotions. I have several more outlandish theories one of which involves banana cream pies and clowns but we have no need to discuss that one unless, that is, I've insulted someone that might be a professional clown. *This last statement was intended as a tension-breaker and was in no way meant to be an insult to anyone.*


With that, hopefully, a dismal memory, can we, or even should we, return to our discussions?

REY