Re: Civility

"Hugh" <hbdandvsd@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:LvmdndyJZPZqaDTbnZ2dnUVZ_jKdnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
....
Some people don't like me, and I just couldn't care less. I'm not here
trying to entertain them.
....
I don't see it as anyone wanting to be liked, or disliked, I see it as
Well, some do. More than themselves wanting to be "liked" or not, they go
out of their way to try to convince _others_ reading & posting here, that
there are "some others" reading/posting here that are not to be liked.
Witness the recent thread on "Why does everyone pick on LZ?" Or past
threads that attempt to denigrate Will, or Lon and others. If that's not a
blatant attempt to control how others perceive a situation, then I'm
apparently in the ranks of the clueless...

a turn off for people who might value a reasonable discussion if the
debaters would observe civility. I really enjoy a discussion between
opposing viewpoints but often leave them when it turns into a shoutdown.
As do I. In fact, that's at the heart of a good dialectic discussion. It's
one of my favorite endeavors! That's how one learns something new; how one
expands their intellectual horizons; how one adds to his or her general
store of knowledge. An opinion, absent an underlying basis in truth, is
absolutely worthless! But damned easy to find. And instead of truth, we're
bombarded non-stop by ideology (the most worthless metric of all), as if it
_were_ the truth!

But how can two posters engage like that when the first poster starts off
with a detailed presentation like the one posted by one of our resident
dim-bulbs about the relative IQ's of some of our leaders? And the entire
presentation was A PATENTLY FALSE LIE taken from a known and vicious web
source and presented as absolute fact and truth? Where can a dialectic
discussion begin when it's based upon "facts" like that? Why is it that
those reading here that take a glee in such a description--even though they
know it to be a lie--are silent when it's presented? Why is it that only
those that are offended by lies and disinformation will respond? Why is
that I wonder...

Why can't our discussions start from a point of truth--such as the actual
IQ's and their educational performances, and work our way from there to
opinions about their relative merits? Could it be that there's an inherent
need to hurt or damage one side of the conversation, and the truth doesn't
conveniently lend itself to that? And when it doesn't we simply make up
"facts", and by endless repetition we use how many times they've been
"heard" as a metric for "fact"?

How does one have a discussion of merit suitable for improving ones
knowledge base when one side of the conversation is an assertion made up out
of whole lies, and then the entire ensuing repartee is spent in: "Yes it
is!" "No it isn't!"...ad infinitum? How does that generate a dialectic
discussion from a base like that? Why do most threads presented here by the
various "sides" always end up like that?

You yourself spouted some nonsense a while back, and when challenged to
support them, it became another in a long round of pissing contests of how
you can't be bothered to do the work for those that wanted to actually learn
something from it. Why do discussions always have to devolve to that? Tom
did that as well a while back. Is that because we no longer value truth and
facts, but must do our best to score either political or pseudo-intellectual
points?

Why does one side or the other (they _both_ do it) have to make up some
assertion or opinion based upon nothing at all, call it fact, and go from
there as if it had legs? If you're going to spout an assertion, you should
at least have basis for it. And simply hating the person(s) you're
spouting about doesn't form a sound basis for a conversation...at least not
a meaningful one.

There has been no end to one side spouting some glowing accolade about how
their great bubba or their perception of our (so-called) "stupid" current
resident of the oval office did this or that. And when LZ trots out a bit
of information showing where that assertion isn't true, _he_ gets attacked!
He's called a poodle or lap-dog of the administration. There's never an
attempt to refute what he says by presenting other factual information or
discussion what the material presented actually portends to represent.

And lest you think the "other side" of that discussion is blameless, all one
has to do is get into morality or religion and that side goes apoplectic
with hand-waving and recounting egregiously detailed 27th-hand translations
of lost languages about events recounted from mouth to ear for 200
generations--the veracity of which none of 'em have any clue about--as if
they were fact! How's that any different than presenting a fraudulent
presidential IQ chart? Anybody?

Where does reality start? Or, probably more importantly, where does it
stop? I've had the pleasure of meeting many of the folks that post here--a
couple of 'em just a few days ago. In all cases they were wonderful folks!
Conversations were indeed animated, interesting, and dialectic--and that's
the way it should be. Why is it that only when folks post here that any
manner of lie, innuendo, or falsehood is presented as if it were the gospel
and the sole arbiter of truth?

Frankly, I'm fed up with it. I wouldn't even participate in it, except that
then the forces of lies and darkness (from either side) think their spew is
indeed fact...and will try to act on it if allowed to do so. If our great
country is to survive, that can't kind of garbage can not be allowed to
stand unopposed. So again and again, those of us that are the true
"remnants" of civil society have to step up and be soldiers for truth and
reality. And frankly, as I'd mentioned, I'm getting tired of taking the
slings and arrows of the idiots and morons that constantly surround us and
do their best to tear our free & civil society down.

It was Edmund Burke that said, "The only thing necessary for the triumph of
evil is for good men to do nothing." The same goes for truth and honesty.
While LZ & I may have different motivations for doing what we do, what could
the possible motivation of someone that posts absolute false, lying,
dishonest, drek--as if it were true--gain? Their own self-respect? The
respect of others? And if others, who would you stoop so low for in order
to impress?

But then again, that's just MESHO...


L8r all,
Dusty

Hugh


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: done it1
    ... It is your lack of reading skills that hurt you so much in topic after topic, and this is just one more reminder of that. ... the truth cannot be manufactured. ... liberals and other thinkers. ... As Brock likes to claim, Osama will turn up when we need him to most. ...
    (misc.survivalism)
  • Re: done it1
    ... reading TMT, Winton, Brock, Myal, and Bugleman. ... the truth cannot be manufactured. ... So you are saying that you are smarter than Brock, TMT, Winston, Myal, ... Usually, it was nonsense the first time, and the hundredth time. ...
    (misc.survivalism)
  • Re: Socrates and the Liar
    ... The truth of a statement that asserts the truth of another statement ... of reading do not inform an act of reading even if they facilitate it. ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: "Theatre of God"
    ... emotional high one gets from exciting theater, special effects and loud, ... of the truth of what one's reading or thinking about. ... An audience may or may not be a congregation. ...
    (uk.religion.christian)
  • (I corrected some of the mistypes,)Who is responsible for hijacking our Governments and our Religion
    ... There is no doubt that after trying to get help from the Media to try to get the Government to Redress our Just Petitions for a Redress of Grievances, and to try to get them to help stop Terrorist Hackers from hacking our Computers and using Deception and Lies to us the Government and Religious Systems that they hijacked to set us up, destroying our Liberty, our Lives, and our Pursuit of Happiness, that the Owners and Sponsors of CNN, Time Warner Cable, Time Magazine, and other Media Networks connected to them, are those directly responsible for Helping the Terrorists Hack our Computers, as the Media deliberately hides our Just Issues, and deliberately goes around every Issue, substituting Counterfeits instead of Telling the Truth, and Promoting every False Way trying to continue to get us Unjustly Persecuted, as they hijacked our Governments, and our Religions, to reduce us under an absolute State of Despotism across the entire Face of the Globe. ... What is the benefit in substituting one system that failed because that it was built on deception and lies against the Truth from King Yahweh, with another system that is built on deception and lies against the Truth from King Yahweh? ...
    (alt.politics)
Loading