It was Popper who said the tolerant cannot tolerate the intolerant. So CC has Popper on his side too.
It’s getting tiresome responding directly to your words CC, something like “mind reading” is a common phrase, and it seems almost like trolling when you refuse to acknowledge it. It’s a basic skill to know when you are reading someone’s body language correctly and when you are assuming something about them. It’s something a pig-headed, lying politician or gun-toting redneck would not be good at, but you should be. You should at least try.
In your street smarts example, should I say, “hey, you with the leather jacket, I don’t like the way you are looking at me, I’m sure that you are thinking of robbing me.” ? Yeah, I don’t think so.
It was Popper who said the tolerant cannot tolerate the intolerant. So CC has Popper on his side too.Depends how you define tolerant and intolerant.
I can tolerate a guy who went out on the internet and got confused by some snazzy videos. There are only about 30 million people like that out there, so you might want to learn to how to deal with them.
Do you guys know who Matt Dillahunty is? He is not known for tolerance. You can find on the Austin Atheist Experience yelling at Christians for years. He changed his tune somewhat in the last few years, although he still does the yelling too. But he managed to get invited into churches, for discussion, not debate. He spent a whole weekend at one, doing several “forums” for the congregants. In the final one, during service, their leaders were wrapping up their experience, and they began to argue with each other about the things he had said, in front of God and everybody. He said he would never do events like that again, too much trouble, but you would never get them arguing with each other like that if you were standing out in front of the church telling them they are wrong. They would just go inside and close the door in your face.
Don’t tolerate intolerance. Do tolerate ignorance.
You can’t fight intolerance with tolerance. Tolerating ignorance is necessary to fight ignorance.
Knowing whether someone is being intolerant or is merely guilty of ignorance, is the question you need to answer before taking one of the paths. When in doubt, be tolerant.
Matt Dillahunty is great. I agree he is pretty harsh on some people who don’t deserve it and that he’s getting better at controlling himself as the years go by.
Knowing whether someone is being intolerant or is merely guilty of ignorance, is the question you need to answer before taking one of the paths. When in doubt, be tolerant.Very succinct. I may quote that one.
I think Epoch Times is a very well funded and VERY active propaganda machine.
As far as knowing who to tolerate, it is next to impossible most of the time to tell who is just a chronic ignorer from the RepugLIARS. Hence, I tend to just react negatively to attacks on truth or the spreading or openly acknowledged acceptance of untruths.
If the ignorers happen to support the goals of the RepugLIARS, they are functionally just as bad. The RepugLIARS love the ignorers, because the ignorers are not interested enough in what is true or not, to even pay attention. That is great for the RepugLIARS. The RepugLIARS are also happy with mass confusion and chaos as this helps cloud and undermine truth.
Today, with the unprecedented horrific circumstances happening in the USA and the world, it seems remarkable to me that the ignorers can continue to ignore. But I guess it works for them in their myopic existence, at least in the short term.
It figures that you would react to me sharing some personal details with a broad generalization on your view of “liberals”. Your comment says nothing about me, but quite a bit about you, oneguy. I was UMC, which isn’t “most people”, but it’s the entire suburbia, and a big chunk of those who vote. It’s where kids often work at the businesses that their parent’s (and friends of their parent’s) own, so actually, they relate to a wide swath of Americana. I could go a mile or so in one direction and go bowling alongside blue collars, or a few miles in another direction and see the lake homes where the really rich lived.Fair enough.
When I first met UMC people in my teens they seemed RICH but it was probably more about their attitude rather than their parent’s actual income.
My point is that some people who grow up in that, let’s say privileged background, are negatively affected by it and they always become liberal “do-gooder” types later in life – which can lead to a smugness that doesn’t mix with the stance of trying to give back to society.
So truth and honesty are totally superfluous.Nobody said that.
The big issue here is that you are simply too pessimistic to do anything other than cry; and people like that always think they’re the only ones facing reality.
It’s their only excuse.
The truth is many people face realities far worse than you’ve ever dealt with and handle it much better than you.
The big issue here is that you are simply too pessimistic to do anything other than cry; and people like that always think they’re the only ones facing reality.It’s their only excuse.
The truth is many people face realities far worse than you’ve ever dealt with and handle it much better than you.
Amen to that!
How about people who are realistically pessimistic, and rage against the perpetrators who are the realistic reason for pessimism? Do you think there is something wrong with those people? Or do you just admire stoicism so much that you prefer that people only quietly abide suffering that is the result of the behavior of others?
If someone were behaving in a way that risked the life of a family member of yours, would you do or say anything about it? Or would you consider that to be whiney?
I tend to be quite optimistic about what could be, if we were not burdened with T rump’s incompetence and personal pathology.
When I first met UMC people in my teens they seemed RICH but it was probably more about their attitude rather than their parent’s actual income.I base my view of people on more than a few of them that I met when I was a teenager. You should try it.
I can tolerate a guy who went out on the internet and got confused by some snazzy videos.
And you give a total free pass to that malicious video. You give the words the guy chooses a free pass. You think his disappearance and my fault because I hurt his feelings??? Or is it perhaps an indication that he* was a phony drive-by who’s interest is in spreading confusing and stultification.
Before start accusing other’s of trolling - perhaps you should reread this thread.
(* I dear and now you can smack me for assuming it was a guy. But the real issue of this rampant tactically malicious bullshit like that video stacked with from start to finish.
Bet you can’t point out one damned serious minute in either video - I dare you to try - would love hear were that video or its makers had anything but brainwashing on their minds! But all that you say we are supposed to forgive and turn the other cheek?)
CC: So truth and honesty are totally superfluous. That Guy: Nobody said thatBullshit!!! Every time you stand their pronouncing trump is the best we can hope for - yet you go crickets when asked for serious details of why you believe something so ignorant. Damned straight I used the word, so sue me.
When I think about your habit of snotty one liners, I’d say you are one of those who thinks truth is what you chose it to be.
Why can’t you defend what you believe truth is, with facts and rationale and serious arguments? Instead you merely pronounce it with one liners and riddles.
Oh and guy loves the t-prez who can’t get through a day without stringing together another pack of lies intended to divert attention away from real issues and sane solutions. Not that that is a problem for guy, it’s always those science loving liberals at fault for everything real and imagined.
Oh but I’m being too a harsh prick again.
Excuse me, while I go off to puke and get on with a busy day.
Oops, then this memory smacks me and I can’t leave the silliness be, so I’m back for a moment.
In your street smarts example, should I say, “hey, you with the leather jacket, I don’t like the way you are looking at me, I’m sure that you are thinking of robbing me.” ? Yeah, I don’t think so.Silly, silly. Guess you don't appreciate it's the big smile and glad-hand that had holds more dangers - than the tough scary looking dudes.
Silly, silly. Guess you don’t appreciate it’s the big smile and glad-hand that had holds more dangers – than the tough scary looking dudes.True enough. In my own personal hubris, I have said things to tough scary looking strangers in public at times, that might well insult them. Nothing bad has come of it for me, so far.
I think that tough scary looking guys tend to have a confidence of ego that does not insult easily. And they are probably used to some people like me, probing for weakness. If they can let my pretend insult go, or laugh it off, then they are ok in my book.
That being said, I don’t recommend anyone else trying this eccentric tactic.
Oh but I’m being too a harsh prick again.I think you were being just the right amount of a harsh prick.
Bet you can’t point out one damned serious minute in either video – I dare you to try – would love hear were that video or its makers had anything but brainwashing on their minds! But all that you say we are supposed to forgive and turn the other cheek?)I already did that. This is totally unhinged. I'm not taking any bets from you. I didn't give anything a pass. You have moved into "things that are difficult to be unsaid" territory with me. You get lot more leeway as online friend, but "friend" is becoming a difficult word for me to maintain with you.
Guess you don’t appreciate it’s the big smile and glad-hand that had holds more dangers – than the tough scary looking dudes.That would be a different example wouldn't it. What kind of response is that? Evasive? Deflecting? I didn't say anything about the glad-hand, and I'm not going to say something simply because you brought it up.