11 Aug 2009, 10:11 pm
11 Aug 2009, 10:15 pm
11 Aug 2009, 11:32 pm
12 Aug 2009, 12:31 am
12 Aug 2009, 12:40 am
Yes, in a way. Merely because most aspies don't have the guts to speak on a subject they don't have some sort of preoccupation with, but still, they are right then 
12 Aug 2009, 12:44 am
12 Aug 2009, 1:49 am
12 Aug 2009, 2:03 am
12 Aug 2009, 5:15 am
12 Aug 2009, 5:22 am
Tantybi wrote:
Doublefrost wrote:
Of course we're always right. When those pesky things like facts and evidence rarely indicate otherwise then it's merely enemy propaganda and can be ignored.
I find that adding several new facts can change the subject or end it entirely. Note that these are not good for job security if used in the workplace.
1. Determine if the one speaking to you is an idiot. If result positive, immediately inform them.
2. If they habitually answer your question with an answer that has nothing to do with your question, tell them that they didn't answer that at all, ask them nicely to answer the question. Failing that result, tell them that they must be stupid if they think that game is going to work on you.
3. Resign yourself to the tendency of the typical idiot of speaking to convey emotional nonsense rather than data and fact. Preempt them by telling them to knock that off and not speak to you until they're prepared to think about what they say before they open their mouth.
For anyone who takes that seriously, it's only semi-serious in nature. Naturally, you have to show a little more tact than that. (Sometimes, anyway. Well, I usually don't.) Unless of course, they give ample reason to give them the ruthless truth about themselves. Prepare to take cover if you do.
Remember fact three, too. It's pretty useful in evaluating what they're trying to do. A lot of the time, you should be able to notice that they seem to place extreme emotional attachment on the cesspool of garbage bubbling from their communicative anatomy. They don't bother to make sure it's factually accurate because frankly, it doesn't matter to them. The emotional attachment to it is what does matter to them.
I find that adding several new facts can change the subject or end it entirely. Note that these are not good for job security if used in the workplace.
1. Determine if the one speaking to you is an idiot. If result positive, immediately inform them.
2. If they habitually answer your question with an answer that has nothing to do with your question, tell them that they didn't answer that at all, ask them nicely to answer the question. Failing that result, tell them that they must be stupid if they think that game is going to work on you.
3. Resign yourself to the tendency of the typical idiot of speaking to convey emotional nonsense rather than data and fact. Preempt them by telling them to knock that off and not speak to you until they're prepared to think about what they say before they open their mouth.
For anyone who takes that seriously, it's only semi-serious in nature. Naturally, you have to show a little more tact than that. (Sometimes, anyway. Well, I usually don't.) Unless of course, they give ample reason to give them the ruthless truth about themselves. Prepare to take cover if you do.
Remember fact three, too. It's pretty useful in evaluating what they're trying to do. A lot of the time, you should be able to notice that they seem to place extreme emotional attachment on the cesspool of garbage bubbling from their communicative anatomy. They don't bother to make sure it's factually accurate because frankly, it doesn't matter to them. The emotional attachment to it is what does matter to them.
IN all truth, I don't inform people when they test positive for the moron syndrome. However, I do kind of look at them funny. I wonder if they pick up on that.
I do remind people what the question was when they keep answering other questions that I never asked. I do call them out on it, usually saying, "If you can't answer the question, then just say you don't know."
People who get emotional about what they are talking about, i.e. religion, politics, sports, prochoice....I tend to change the subject because their emotions tend to put them in an irrational state, and you are just beating your head into a brick wall attempting to speak rationally to an irrational person. Bottom line is that you aren't going to change their emotional opinion with logic, so don't even try. Best to change the subject or listen half heartedly for a minute.
Now when I'm debating and the other person has ran out of facts and logic and has resorted to emotional forms of debate, such as "you don't love me if you disagree" type thing, then I point out "moving the discussion from logic to emotion only proves to me that you've ran out of productive things to say on the subject, and that makes me win the debate by default." Most people get very defensive by that at first, but the more they think about it, how can you argue that? I even tell them also as rude as it was for me to say that, it was very rude for them to resort to cheap tactics just for the satisfaction of sitting on the high horse. But the only people who really do this is my mother and my sister. I've never really had strangers pull the emotional card on me, or at least I've never noticed it. But when I do get this ruthless, I do get an alibi because it gets Uhhhgly.
As I've mentioned in another thread, I no longer bother paying attention to politics, religion, or any of that. Most of it is there for the emotional attachment; so that people can say "I'm important; I matter!"
To which my response is pretty much "No you...you don't". To paraphrase a line from Exit to Eden by Rosie O'Donnell "you wanna matter? paint my house".
Usually, in regards to politics, the majority just votes in people who represent them to make laws to make them feel good about themselves. Where we get lucky is that as the laws are based on emotion--as opposed to logic--they're also loaded with loopholes, the kind you could not only drive a mach truck thru, but could potentially even start your own thriving civilization.
I say use these loopholes to your advantage. And don't worry about them being closed; when they try to close one, they'll open another. If they really thought that far ahead, the world would be a totally different place.
It's reasons like these I no longer watch the news or read about it online or anything like that. Basically, I say "you wanna know what's going on in the world now, and have a better understanding? read a history book...I assure you you'll find almost no difference".
12 Aug 2009, 7:16 am
TheDoctor82 wrote:
Tantybi wrote:
Doublefrost wrote:
Of course we're always right. When those pesky things like facts and evidence rarely indicate otherwise then it's merely enemy propaganda and can be ignored.
I find that adding several new facts can change the subject or end it entirely. Note that these are not good for job security if used in the workplace.
1. Determine if the one speaking to you is an idiot. If result positive, immediately inform them.
2. If they habitually answer your question with an answer that has nothing to do with your question, tell them that they didn't answer that at all, ask them nicely to answer the question. Failing that result, tell them that they must be stupid if they think that game is going to work on you.
3. Resign yourself to the tendency of the typical idiot of speaking to convey emotional nonsense rather than data and fact. Preempt them by telling them to knock that off and not speak to you until they're prepared to think about what they say before they open their mouth.
For anyone who takes that seriously, it's only semi-serious in nature. Naturally, you have to show a little more tact than that. (Sometimes, anyway. Well, I usually don't.) Unless of course, they give ample reason to give them the ruthless truth about themselves. Prepare to take cover if you do.
Remember fact three, too. It's pretty useful in evaluating what they're trying to do. A lot of the time, you should be able to notice that they seem to place extreme emotional attachment on the cesspool of garbage bubbling from their communicative anatomy. They don't bother to make sure it's factually accurate because frankly, it doesn't matter to them. The emotional attachment to it is what does matter to them.
I find that adding several new facts can change the subject or end it entirely. Note that these are not good for job security if used in the workplace.
1. Determine if the one speaking to you is an idiot. If result positive, immediately inform them.
2. If they habitually answer your question with an answer that has nothing to do with your question, tell them that they didn't answer that at all, ask them nicely to answer the question. Failing that result, tell them that they must be stupid if they think that game is going to work on you.
3. Resign yourself to the tendency of the typical idiot of speaking to convey emotional nonsense rather than data and fact. Preempt them by telling them to knock that off and not speak to you until they're prepared to think about what they say before they open their mouth.
For anyone who takes that seriously, it's only semi-serious in nature. Naturally, you have to show a little more tact than that. (Sometimes, anyway. Well, I usually don't.) Unless of course, they give ample reason to give them the ruthless truth about themselves. Prepare to take cover if you do.
Remember fact three, too. It's pretty useful in evaluating what they're trying to do. A lot of the time, you should be able to notice that they seem to place extreme emotional attachment on the cesspool of garbage bubbling from their communicative anatomy. They don't bother to make sure it's factually accurate because frankly, it doesn't matter to them. The emotional attachment to it is what does matter to them.
IN all truth, I don't inform people when they test positive for the moron syndrome. However, I do kind of look at them funny. I wonder if they pick up on that.
I do remind people what the question was when they keep answering other questions that I never asked. I do call them out on it, usually saying, "If you can't answer the question, then just say you don't know."
People who get emotional about what they are talking about, i.e. religion, politics, sports, prochoice....I tend to change the subject because their emotions tend to put them in an irrational state, and you are just beating your head into a brick wall attempting to speak rationally to an irrational person. Bottom line is that you aren't going to change their emotional opinion with logic, so don't even try. Best to change the subject or listen half heartedly for a minute.
Now when I'm debating and the other person has ran out of facts and logic and has resorted to emotional forms of debate, such as "you don't love me if you disagree" type thing, then I point out "moving the discussion from logic to emotion only proves to me that you've ran out of productive things to say on the subject, and that makes me win the debate by default." Most people get very defensive by that at first, but the more they think about it, how can you argue that? I even tell them also as rude as it was for me to say that, it was very rude for them to resort to cheap tactics just for the satisfaction of sitting on the high horse. But the only people who really do this is my mother and my sister. I've never really had strangers pull the emotional card on me, or at least I've never noticed it. But when I do get this ruthless, I do get an alibi because it gets Uhhhgly.
As I've mentioned in another thread, I no longer bother paying attention to politics, religion, or any of that. Most of it is there for the emotional attachment; so that people can say "I'm important; I matter!"
To which my response is pretty much "No you...you don't". To paraphrase a line from Exit to Eden by Rosie O'Donnell "you wanna matter? paint my house".
Usually, in regards to politics, the majority just votes in people who represent them to make laws to make them feel good about themselves. Where we get lucky is that as the laws are based on emotion--as opposed to logic--they're also loaded with loopholes, the kind you could not only drive a mach truck thru, but could potentially even start your own thriving civilization.
I say use these loopholes to your advantage. And don't worry about them being closed; when they try to close one, they'll open another. If they really thought that far ahead, the world would be a totally different place.
It's reasons like these I no longer watch the news or read about it online or anything like that. Basically, I say "you wanna know what's going on in the world now, and have a better understanding? read a history book...I assure you you'll find almost no difference".
I don't like reading up on the news either. Most of it angers me or bothers me someway some how. I do read some articles on my yahoo home page by chance and interest, but usually useless stuff (like a very generic blog here and there). If people want me to be more interested in the news, if they had writers like Toni Morrison, I'd probably be reading it more often. But most news articles can't even answer the who, what, when, where, and why's anymore, and then they are poorly written like I've seen 5th graders with better grammar, and the topics are so useless and marketing mass hysteria annoying. They won't write or talk about the real bad guys in this world like big business because they don't want to lose their advertising money, but at the same time, the masses believe the bull they have to say, so now Bush is the root of all evil and Obama is going to save us all, that is until the AP decides for us otherwise.
As far as loopholes, I guess it would depend on the situation. Enron found loopholes, and it didn't fly. If the gov't doesn't like what you are doing, they will change the law just to bring you down creating loopholes for another guy to use. I figure as long as you don't get big enough to be on their radar, you'll be good to go.
12 Aug 2009, 7:16 am
Tantybi said:
Quote:
What's funny is that it really annoys me when someone tries to answer a question they don't know the answer to. If more people would respond with "I don't know" when they don't know, the world would function so much better.
I do also get annoyed that people tell me I'm sitting on my high horse as a know it all too. I don't do it for ego either, like most people on here it seems don't do it for ego. I just hate being argued with when I'm positive I'm accurate on something, and I hate the fact that I seem to have zero credibility irregardless of my history. Somewhere along the way, you'd think I'd earn a little respect so that I can make a comment about the weather free of debate. What I hate most of all is when people realize they can't argue with you and that they don't have a leg to stand on, so they change your position for you by twisting around your words and logic to something really ridiculous and irrational, and then they'll argue with you about what you are saying. Oh that gets under my skin so bad.
I will say it has been taming down a lot around me lately. I'm not sure why, but I'm happy for it.
I do also get annoyed that people tell me I'm sitting on my high horse as a know it all too. I don't do it for ego either, like most people on here it seems don't do it for ego. I just hate being argued with when I'm positive I'm accurate on something, and I hate the fact that I seem to have zero credibility irregardless of my history. Somewhere along the way, you'd think I'd earn a little respect so that I can make a comment about the weather free of debate. What I hate most of all is when people realize they can't argue with you and that they don't have a leg to stand on, so they change your position for you by twisting around your words and logic to something really ridiculous and irrational, and then they'll argue with you about what you are saying. Oh that gets under my skin so bad.
I will say it has been taming down a lot around me lately. I'm not sure why, but I'm happy for it.
Oh, the twisting of the words and logic thing drives me crazy. I really have to remove myself from the situation when that happens. And other thing that I can't understand is when I have a difference of opinion and state it in a non argumentative way, just simply saying something like "I disagree. My view point is such and such." Not intending to argue or debate, just simply saying how I see a situation, or a subject, or whatever the case may be. Not trying to de-value their point of view, not saying or believing that my insights, perceptions, observations are superior at all. Why do people turn nasty when I do this? I can't figure it out? It's like they want to rip you a new one just because you see things differently. Why can't we coexist peacefully and express our self differently without all of the defensiveness and anger. Whoa. Makes me want to live a life of complete solitude at times. It's even worse on-line. If you make a post in which you state that you don't agree with a certain point of view, and then respectfully state your own, and especially if your own is different from the majority of posters, wow, watch out. The troops will suddenly appear and attempt to draw and quarter you.
Fortunately, I haven't seen much of that happening lately, but I still avoid certain threads and forums where it's likely to occur.
BTW - Great Avatar.
12 Aug 2009, 11:54 am
cosmiccat wrote:
Tantybi said:
Oh, the twisting of the words and logic thing drives me crazy. I really have to remove myself from the situation when that happens. And other thing that I can't understand is when I have a difference of opinion and state it in a non argumentative way, just simply saying something like "I disagree. My view point is such and such." Not intending to argue or debate, just simply saying how I see a situation, or a subject, or whatever the case may be. Not trying to de-value their point of view, not saying or believing that my insights, perceptions, observations are superior at all. Why do people turn nasty when I do this? I can't figure it out? It's like they want to rip you a new one just because you see things differently. Why can't we coexist peacefully and express our self differently without all of the defensiveness and anger. Whoa. Makes me want to live a life of complete solitude at times. It's even worse on-line. If you make a post in which you state that you don't agree with a certain point of view, and then respectfully state your own, and especially if your own is different from the majority of posters, wow, watch out. The troops will suddenly appear and attempt to draw and quarter you. Fortunately, I haven't seen much of that happening lately, but I still avoid certain threads and forums where it's likely to occur.
BTW - Great Avatar.
Quote:
What's funny is that it really annoys me when someone tries to answer a question they don't know the answer to. If more people would respond with "I don't know" when they don't know, the world would function so much better.
I do also get annoyed that people tell me I'm sitting on my high horse as a know it all too. I don't do it for ego either, like most people on here it seems don't do it for ego. I just hate being argued with when I'm positive I'm accurate on something, and I hate the fact that I seem to have zero credibility irregardless of my history. Somewhere along the way, you'd think I'd earn a little respect so that I can make a comment about the weather free of debate. What I hate most of all is when people realize they can't argue with you and that they don't have a leg to stand on, so they change your position for you by twisting around your words and logic to something really ridiculous and irrational, and then they'll argue with you about what you are saying. Oh that gets under my skin so bad.
I will say it has been taming down a lot around me lately. I'm not sure why, but I'm happy for it.
I do also get annoyed that people tell me I'm sitting on my high horse as a know it all too. I don't do it for ego either, like most people on here it seems don't do it for ego. I just hate being argued with when I'm positive I'm accurate on something, and I hate the fact that I seem to have zero credibility irregardless of my history. Somewhere along the way, you'd think I'd earn a little respect so that I can make a comment about the weather free of debate. What I hate most of all is when people realize they can't argue with you and that they don't have a leg to stand on, so they change your position for you by twisting around your words and logic to something really ridiculous and irrational, and then they'll argue with you about what you are saying. Oh that gets under my skin so bad.
I will say it has been taming down a lot around me lately. I'm not sure why, but I'm happy for it.
Oh, the twisting of the words and logic thing drives me crazy. I really have to remove myself from the situation when that happens. And other thing that I can't understand is when I have a difference of opinion and state it in a non argumentative way, just simply saying something like "I disagree. My view point is such and such." Not intending to argue or debate, just simply saying how I see a situation, or a subject, or whatever the case may be. Not trying to de-value their point of view, not saying or believing that my insights, perceptions, observations are superior at all. Why do people turn nasty when I do this? I can't figure it out? It's like they want to rip you a new one just because you see things differently. Why can't we coexist peacefully and express our self differently without all of the defensiveness and anger. Whoa. Makes me want to live a life of complete solitude at times. It's even worse on-line. If you make a post in which you state that you don't agree with a certain point of view, and then respectfully state your own, and especially if your own is different from the majority of posters, wow, watch out. The troops will suddenly appear and attempt to draw and quarter you.
Fortunately, I haven't seen much of that happening lately, but I still avoid certain threads and forums where it's likely to occur.BTW - Great Avatar.
My sister is infamous for arguing with me when I'm not trying to argue or debate, and I'm not even disagreeing with her more often than not. She's the one who is most infamous in my life for twisting my words too. It infuriates me so much. It wouldn't be a big deal, but she circles my circle of friends, so sometimes I get some interesting rumors about myself started by my sister who then refuses she did that. So, when I get online, nobody argues with me to the irrational state my sister will, so it doesn't really bug me. But I have learned there are some arguments people will force a debate on you and it's a total waste of time to argue about it like religion, pro-life/pro-choice, etc. Once they put that emotional value to it, man there is no telling them otherwise. All they want is to hear you say, "Thank you for showing me the light" when all they show you is crap.
But it doesn't happen all the time. Unfortunately, with me it always seems to happen when I'm least expecting it, so when it does, it tends to throw me for a loop. It's annoying because I'd like to talk about something with substance without debating, but all the topics of substance that most people are willing to talk about are debate topics. So all you can do is master the art of bar talk (what I call chit chat to the next level) and ever so often, you'll find someone where the bar talk will lead to an interesting conversation without debate.
You also learn to kind of profile people and find common topics of interest. I love the topic of religion and theories regarding it. I am Christian, but I have a very open mind and love learning about other beliefs, which is why I don't fit into any church that exists as of now. Either churches are very close minded to their beliefs, or they are too open minded where they accept anybody's beliefs as fact which just gets too confusing to me. Either way, I have learned that people who are wiccan are willing to talk about, not debate, religious issues (especially when it comes to how you relate to religion in your life) with diplomacy, love, and ease. Not all wiccans are like that, but when someone says they are Wiccan and I see they are generally a nice person, I usually take the chance if the opportunity is there to talk about deep spiritual topics. That's just one example of many. I also profile people to not talk about things with. As soon as I hear someone say they are Baptist, I just refuse to take the chance to talk about anything spiritual in nature due to my previous experiences with it unless my intuition tells me otherwise. Also, anyone who reminds me of my sister at all in personality, I watch everything I say very closely and try to not say anything meaningful at all...just keep topics down to American Idol and Soap Operas type thing.
Thank you about my avatar. THat is me and my girls. I finally grew some balls.
12 Aug 2009, 1:11 pm
12 Aug 2009, 1:36 pm
12 Aug 2009, 5:12 pm
