Politically correct people stay out of my threads

Post Reply New Topic

If my views are biased and prejudiced against people who consciously defend greed, ego, hate, hostility, selfishness, and lust for power, then yes I am discriminating against you. Some forms of discrimination, such as this, are neccessary. People like you should be locked up, not set free into the community. Your not human awesome, your an animal.

Technically, I do not know when it officially started. However, I do know that essentially we changed massively and they began resisting and clinging on to their old norms. Really, it is tough drawing a perfect line. However, once they were forced to recognize that things were happening without them they regained a certain imbalance and pushed for growth. Really, I am not that attached to this argument so it is not some deeply held personal belief, I just like disrupting many claims.

people have emotions, it's what makes us sentient beings. There is no way to solve the world's issues through barbarism, it hasn't worked for thousands of years and it won't work now. You obviously do not comprehend action vs. reaction, in other words, what you do to another they will do back to you (or they will retaliate in some way). So you end up with a cluster-fucked society where people are just creating more problems in this endless chain of action vs. reaction.
Of coarse I'm sure you don't consider hunger, disease, poverty, and mindless warfare to be problems

Sentience is a function of our rationality, not emotion. Barbarism can solve some problems, we all know it can solve some. Not only that but action reaction does not mean it will hurt me!!

They are problems because we decide them to be against our interests.

I really don't find it worth my time to argue with you as I clearly have better things to do.

Right, snake321, and that is by all means and measures a sign of clarity of course! I mean, the deference of logic to bias and emotion is the height of civilization and shutting out what we do not want to hear is against barbarity!! !

You get caught constantly on logic, friend. For starters, you expect people to listen to you, when you apparently can't even open your mouth without pissing them off. You expect to be able to attack them, without them responding with an attack in turn. This is hardly logical.

You charge people with being stupid and ape-like when you apparently don't even have a solid grasp of spelling and grammar. For example, in the above quote you use "since" when you mean "sense", and "your" when you mean "you are". If your goal is to seem more intelligent than others, such mistakes are hardly convincing. Rather, they only leave people chuckling at the irony.



How dare they not agree with you, right? Perhaps they have the right to their own opinions as much as you do, and find your assumptions as illogical as you find their own?



Translation: I have no social skills and can't get along with anybody, but rather than putting the blame where it belongs and growing past my problems, I want to whine, b***h, and blame the rest of the world.

I think we can all guess exactly how far that attitude has taken you in life.



Logically speaking, people whom you've pissed off are not going to do what you want them to.



For someone who says they value logic, you're definitely not being very logical on this thread. You also seem rather emotionally worked up over the whole thing. Hmm...

Last edited by Hazelwudi on 19 Feb 2007, 3:29 am, edited 4 times in total.

I'm good at that, yes.

I also admittedly troll for brawls on occasion.... which was precisely what I was doing!

In many ways, trolling for brawls is the dark side of social skills. In an ordinary application of social skills, you use the target's worldview, beliefs, and assumptions about human nature as a guide to what they'd find likeable.

When you troll for brawls, you take the target's worldview, beliefs, and assumptions about human nature, show them the critical points where it all breaks down, and shake them apart with cognitive dissonance.

Like I said, truth is a hammer... it's all in how you wield it.

I have yet to meet a single person, online or off, who did not have some kind of illogical belief... an ideological "sacred cow", as it were. We all become very angry when someone takes one of ours to the metaphorical slaughterhouse... and yet we all view slaughtering the sacred cows of others as a particularly self-affirming form of entertainment.

The "sacred cow" is generally one of the weakest (if not the weakest) point in any given person, psychologically speaking... it is an irrational assumption from which they deduce a substantial part of their worldview. Unfortunately, however logically they may deduce what might follow from such premises, at least one premise is critically flawed, and it leads to equally flawed conclusions.

True to my Western scientifically-minded upbringing, one of my sacred cows is the belief that underneath all the apparent chaos and disorder of the world, there is a perfect underlying order and sense to the world.

One of my fiance's sacred cows is the belief that being disaffected, alienated, and "angsty" in an existential way is a sign of intelligence, when in fact these things have nothing to do with intelligence whatsoever and are instead signs of psychological dysfunction.

One of the most popular "sacred cows" in any sort of counterculture is that somehow the mainstream is responsible for the individual problems experienced by those in the counterculture, when in fact the problems are generally of their own making.

One of the most popular "sacred cows" in mainstream thought is that misfits and dissidents are responsible for the problems of the mainstream, when the overwhelming majority of the time the mainstream's short-sightedness is to blame.

The rich generally consider their socioeconomic status as a sign of being "better" than others... when in fact it is generally a sign that they (or their ancestors) were simply better at screwing other people out of their money. Another sacred cow!

The poor generally consider their socioeconomic status as due to factors beyond their control... when in fact it is generally due to their inability to delay gratification and to plan for the future. Another sacred cow!

Sometimes I think that the main problem that Aspies have socially does not involve an inability to pinpoint these "sacred cows" of others, but rather that Aspies pinpoint them too well... and simply can't resist dragging out the meat grinder.

YES, it's fun! Unfortunately, it's also hardly the way to win friends and influence people. If that's what you want... to be listened to, liked, respected... then you are left with two choices. You can either stop going after other people's sacred cows, or you can try to find a niche in society where everyone has the same sacred cows as yours. The latter is almost impossibly difficult, so I'd recommend an honest attempt at the former.

... well, that's what I'd recommend, unless you are trolling for brawls.

MOOO!! !

I do respect the ability to find those sacred cows and such, however, being able to hit a nerve in this instance is not that hard so it is not like you accomplished something that big. If you did this to somebody else I might be more impressed, however, I have already gotten the guy to call out for my death and insult me at any occasion as you could see earlier so I know that pissing him off isn't hard.

All this from someone who feels that they have an intuitive grasp of the "Truth" and have had this since youth! Sorry about that. At any rate you can hardly call that "politically correct". Besides, you have it the wrong way around; political correctness, as I understand it, is more about an overly cautious and arguably distorted form of reason hardly worthy of the name over-riding emotions and prejudices in the interest of maintaining calm and social cohesion (admittedly admirable objectives, but so are security, knowledge, love and freedom, and look at all the mischief they create). You had better leave your threads open to both politically correct types and religious fanatics. (Only one third jesting here). If anyone breaches the guidelines of this forum, the moderators can always wield sanctions and expell them from Wrong Planet. This may not appeal to you and I would miss them both, but you yourself have wisely stated, "There is no freedom without responsibility." With that at least I fully and unreservedly concur. Satisfied? If there is free will we must be held accountable for our actions; if not, judgement and forgiveness are alike rendered meaningless.

Hey, I just realised how ironic it is that I am speaking of expulsion from Wrong Planet when I only recently condemned the excommunication of a man by his congregation for political differences, and equally the similar treatment of a moderate Muslim by his local mosque. No hard feelings, I hope, snake321. I trust that you will not be offended as such sensitivity would show signs of incipient political correctness. Without political correctness and religious fanaticism you would have no one to argue with, and your mind would grow barren. As will the PCs and RFs if they are not allowed to argue with you. I am talking about your mutual interests here! Who would have thought such a thing existed between you? Cheerio.

No, if everyone stopped being PC freaks and RFs, and stopped acting like barbarians and used logic and rationale, then I'd have no reason to "attack people". Notice I put that in quotes, I'm not patrolling for a slug fest, all I'm doing is (inadvertently to some extent) slapping people in the face with the truth. Here is a layout, you tell me which philosophy is more likely to lead to a stable lifestyle and society:

- ignoring truth to avoid offending people (you can't fix a problem if you don't acknowledge a problem exists in the 1st place)
- blindly fighting for religious dominance
- deliberately acting like an ape, like mr. spoc here does (awesomegloriousness)
- using logic, rational, and balance and compromise. This would require people rising above their genetic inner animals.

Also, note, if people CAN evolve to live in a utopian society and universal mentality, and without any conflict, what purpose is there in leaving a world of suffering to go on, mr. spoc? Merely because your too stupid and lazy to care, maybe because your already too bloodthisty and you like seing people suffer?
I'm not patrolling for a fight, I'm just pointing out the unbias truth that apparently most people here can't handle. You come crashing down on me with this pc crap but I haven't heard anybody come down on the blatant filth Mr. Spoc is on here spewing. He's alot more "politically incorrect" than I am. I mean for f**k sake, the guy comes on here OPENLY glorifying acting like a greedy, selfish, ciniving, back-stabbing, hostile, insensitive sack of s**t. He's f*****g been on here defending sweat shops, claiming women belong tied to the beds, and innocent animals being abused for no other purpose than to satiate his bloodlust.

I mean listen to his statement reguarding hunger, disease, mindless war, and oppression. He just stated that these things are "only problems because people decided theyr problems", which is basically saying "I don't care how much your suffering or being tortured, it doesn't effect ***ME***)"

I'm not offended Alexander, I'm annoyed.

Acting like an ape? Well, considering that Mr. Spock and the ape are completely different personas, I really do not see how that is necessarily true. Not only that but usually apes are the ones lacking eloquence, I'd say that I have some, I would also think that most would agree.

Let's see, I do defend sweatshops, however, many intellectual economists do as well so which means I am not some fringe minority. I don't remember arguing for tying women up, though it could have been some form of sexist joke. The animal abuse thing had nothing to do with my bloodlust though, I would not do it if it were legal, I just wanted to argue that it could be.

Well, actually there can be good arguments for that. Have you ever read Brave New World? It shows a world that is completely utopian but so revolting that most would not accept it. However, assuming that such is not the case, one must recognize that my arguments were not for human suffering in most cases but rather either for pragmatic policy or to rattle up people's set beliefs. Not only that but I argue for people, not animals. Calling me bloodthirsty is most certainly a distortion of facts. I am bitter and misanthropic, with a very twisted sense of humor, however, do not mistake that for a desire to worsen the world for people. As well, I am most certainly not lazy nor am I stupid, I am intelligent and I do have to work relatively hard in order to do the things I do.

Awesomelyglorious, or the image he allegedly and presumably actually projects of himself, sounds like a truly horrible human being (but normally people like this conceal it better, so it may just be a twisted sense of "humour"). Of course using logic, reason and compromise (rational is an adjective requiring a noun to modify, Snake, and you do not exactly compromise readily, not invariably a bad thing in matters of principle) is a preferable way to live. If you have been reading my posts it should be clear that I agree with much of your philosophy. And I was using some humour near the end of my last post, probably a mistake.

I also hate to break this to you, but you ARE a fanatic. Your adamantine conviction that you are the calm rational one possessing the truth... Alright that was a little harsh. But seriously you possess many textbook symptoms of fanaticism... This may be a provocative line of inquiry, but I think that you should explore it. I myself could at different points in my life be described as politically correct or as a religious fanatic, so I believe a LITTLE humility and tolerance is called for upon my part (unless I wish to be a fanatic again). This is not to say that one should condone the many things wrong with humanity, but one should acknowledge one's own faults and enter into the struggle to be a better person and make the world a better place with a clear understanding of them and compassion for others who are struggling. Please understand that I hold you in the highest esteem.

And how is exclusion linked to compromise?

Yes, utterly utterly horrible. The philosophy I try to defend is choice and I merely recognize that those whom we oft-times disagree with morally still have rationality. snake very strongly believes in his variant of objective morality as being the absolute truth and therefore when I question it or claim that these others in existence do in fact act based upon some rationality I am therefore the evil one as truth would dictate. I do argue for the unorthodox, and I will admit that, and the only gain I value is human gain, but I would hardly see how I am a "truly horrible human being" given the rather lacking amount of horrible things I have actually done with my time and life.