(Dec 15, 2016 07:18 PM)Carol Wrote: [ -> ]There is a difference between arguing points of an issue, and insulting or disrespecting people. I have been told a very insulting exchange of words between posters, is just friendly interaction that has been going for a long time. It is my impression that this kind of social bantering is more common for males than females who might understand the words as hurtful insults instead of friendly banter But there is also a difference between what can be said in an established relationship and saying the same thing when there is no established relationship. The quality of relationships plays a very big role in how people understand each other.
Bottomline, in forums, most often the problem is a social one. It is more a matter of being offensive than the intellectual error explained in the OP. Anyone who doesn't believe this and thinks the problem is not knowing how to argue facts, should try stating arguments in a respectful way and see what happens. Fortunately, I can only get 3 negative points for making this argument, but it could lead to an improvement in my experience here. On the other hand, it could lead to someone searching for my post and creating reasons to give more negative points as I have been experiencing ever since saying I do NOT read past being offended and refusing to engage with this person until the offensiveness stops.
This is an ad-hoc argument "Since it's obvious you have erroneous assumptions". It is not a respectable argument.
An argument should be on the topic not a critical assumption about the other person.
In a way offending people in a forum like this one is like cheating at Monopoly or any other life game. The person may win the game, but who wants to play with a cheater. It is putting things on an emotional level and there it is not intellectually honest. The challenge is to make arguments without emotional plays. What we have is a vicious circle of bad behavior, rejection, low self-esteem and increased need to win any way one can, in a desperate attempt to feel like a winner and have self-esteem. It is a social problem not an intellectual win achieved without cheating.
Maybe you should look back at your own interactions.
You and I had gotten along find, but here, you jumped in to say I was off-topic for answering a direct question from MR (who started the thread).
https://www.scivillage.com/thread-2995-p...ml#pid7689 Oddly, you didn't admonish MR for bringing up the subject. I let that go.
Then you admonished both SS and MR, starting to establish a habit for lecturing others.
https://www.scivillage.com/thread-2995-p...ml#pid7691 https://www.scivillage.com/thread-2995-p...ml#pid7708 Remember, I had already been here for awhile dealing with these two.
Then not only do you call SS posting a video ad hominem, you jump all over the simple opinion, "John Edward is entertaining. I love a good mentalist...much better then illusion", calling it "ad hominem" and saying I "killed the discussion".
https://www.scivillage.com/thread-3013-p...ml#pid7692 Saying something is "entertaining" explicitly implies opinion, not fact.
And then you go completely off the rails because I said, "You don't seem to understand."
https://www.scivillage.com/thread-3013-p...ml#pid7698 It wasn't even an insult or bad manors, but you said, "That is an assumption about me and I am not reading any further."
Even after that, I was respectful to you. And what did I get for my respect? You brought up the topic of what is empirical.
https://www.scivillage.com/thread-3013-p...ml#pid7737 Only to tell me that empirical information was off-topic when you didn't like my respectful answers.
https://www.scivillage.com/thread-3013-p...ml#pid7746 Even after saying, "I will be glad to make an argument that is on topic, when I see an argument that is on topic
and connected with science."
https://www.scivillage.com/thread-3013-p...ml#pid7719 And I still continued to reply respectfully.
And after all this lecturing about staying on-topic, you admit, "Oh my, I am afraid it is my fault your thread went way off topic."
https://www.scivillage.com/thread-3006-p...ml#pid7733 Starting to see a double standard here.
Then you lost your shit over this.
https://www.scivillage.com/thread-3021-p...ml#pid7805 Even though you said, "I rather follow the studies that say the heart and feelings are important", admitting your cherry-picking of data to affirm your preferred bias, you were terribly offended that I found that sad.
All of our interactions since have largely entailed you playing the victim and further lecturing....hence incurring more derision. So, you started the disrespectful behavior, and I even gave you plenty of leeway before responding in kind. You have demonstrated yourself to be intellectually dishonest...bringing up topics you then hypocritically claim are off-topic. You have been offensive and have demonstrably suffered from the intellectual complacency described in the OP. Your constant admonitions about respect are a transparent way to avoid supporting your own arguments, and that disrespects the intelligence of others. If you're just that cavalier about facts or just expressing your opinion, you should make that clear.
You demonstrate a double standard, where "Since it's obvious you have erroneous assumptions" is not warranted as a response to "It’s an immature defense mechanism". How is the latter any more respectful than the former? And how is it ad hoc to tell someone they have made wrong assumptions?
You have done that yourself. How does "That is an assumption about me and I am not reading any further" tonally differ from "Since it's obvious you have erroneous assumptions"? Were you not trying to say that I had assumed things incorrectly? At least I didn't make mine an ultimatum..trying to manipulate others.
Your intellectual dishonesty is cheating, and acting like a victim and trying to shame others is nothing but an emotional play.
Now let's hear the usual chorus of "I'm not reading past..."
(Dec 16, 2016 02:24 AM)Secular Sanity Wrote: [ -> ] (Dec 16, 2016 01:06 AM)Syne Wrote: [ -> ]I didn't realize you intended any of that to reinforce anything I had said. I thought it was just your own standalone position.
It was both.
And if you had quoted more of what I said, you'd see I acknowledged that.
"Anyway, if that was part of the intent, I wouldn't ask for or encourage it, but I appreciate it all the same. "
