Why it's important to criticize people who say stupid things.

Discussion in 'Philosophy' started by ArgoSG, May 2, 2011.

  1. anyone actually observe a person's IQ going up cause you treated them like crap ?
     
  2. Sounds a bit like one of those absolutist statements you don't like.
     
  3. If someone says something you find mindbogglingly stupid, it's expected of you to demonstrate why said statement is stupid.

    I think spirituality and philosophy is a realm outside critique, because saying the earth was created by gila monsters is just as valid a statement as saying it was created by God.

    Philosophy is, in my opinion, inherently personal. Any philosophy, the ones you learn through books/tv and the philosophy you make up on your own, is only true if it resonates with the person reading it, and even then it's true for that person, it isn't a general absolute truth that applies to all humanity.

    When it comes to anything else though, anything not metaphysical, you could and should demonstrate why someone is wrong using proof to back up your (and probably the widely held) view.

    When someone still doesn't agree, not accepting/disputing the facts you've laid out for him, he's just stubborn. Probably because it's hard to let go of your own view and accepting you were wrong (especially on the internet, because you've probably been insulted 10 times before you realize you're wrong).

    There's no arguing with stubborn people.

    I prefer to let people believe what they believe after I've shown them they're wrong and they still won't change their minds. You can't MAKE someone accept an other version, you can only take comfort in the fact that you know you're right.
     
  4. When I feel the need to criticize someone because of their beliefs it is because I feel I am on the front lines of a war. I don't want someones (as I see it) ridiculous dogmas and ideology's to run my country, state, city and I sure as hell don't want them trying to teach my children that dinosaurs walked with humans, it is immoral to be a homosexual, or to feel inadequacy because they are a fallen human. Hopefully some people can see my moral right and obligation for this!
     
  5. It can only appear to be an absolutist statement if you believe that I could possibly be saying an absolute statement. I make no absolute statements. I'm not even absolutely saying I make no absolute statements
     
  6. is it or isn't it possible?
     
  7. It is possible for us to APPEAR negative, or even believe we are negative. But we cannot ultimately be negative, just like we cannot be ultimately positive. These are just concepts, and they are limiting if you place absolute truth in them
     
  8. Vague isn't deep.
     
  9. I'm not trying to be vague. I'm not trying to be deep. You can use whatever label you'd like to describe it, it doesn't change it
     
  10. That's simply nonsensical, you mean to say you don't make absolutist statements (which that is one) then go to say that your not absolutely saying you make no absolute statements?:confused: You either do or don't, I vote with you do (which doesn't make me better or worse since I do the same thing). We have to lay absolutist claims in order for us to even function in reality.
     
  11. Yes, we must CHOOSE which absolutist clames we make to function. We can never stop making absolutist statements. Yet we choose what definition those absolute statements have
     
  12. You can't avoid the absolute statements even while you dance around trying to say nothing. I don't understand the importance of saying "I'm not negative!" You propose that you can add two negatives together (you are NOT negative, NOT positive) to get a positive appearance. This is what you call not being negative.

    I would say you ARE negative and ARE positive, and quite often for this I am called negative for supposing the positive alternative.
     
  13. "No worries! Be happy!"

    - Bob Marley
     
  14. I'm not sure whether or not I agree with this. I'm still studying and forming my own opinion. Right now, I choose to embrace the general sense of "good" and "love" as the right Up, Good, Right, etc. because it is naturally conducive to life. However, destruction also has its use as a tool for being conducive to life by being conducive to the greater good. Ehhhh... it's hazy. I'm reading the bible at the moment because I see symbollic patterns in its fables that represent what I currently understand. So I'll see what conclusions studying that leads me to.
     
  15. Richard Dawkins should have named his 'God Delusion' the title of this thread.
     
  16. The point is, it all comes from the source. It's a pretty big assumption to assume you could be separate from the souce. Doesn't really make sense, actually
     

Share This Page