Intolerance - a new breed of ex-JW (page 20)

Terry

By all means, stop being pedantic whenever you like. I will welcome the unexpected change in your previous course.
AuldSoul

If I didn't love you I wouldn't bother.

Terry

2) Anyone who believes something so stupid should off themselves and free up some oxygen for the rest of us, we'll obviously make better use of it

Intolerant, eh?

Terry

Passive aggressive? Did you even bother to look that one up after you read it on this mornings "phrase for a day" sheet of toilet roll?

Ohhhh, touched a nerve did we?

Until people agree on what definitions they are using the conversation is always at cross purposes.

Then, everybody gets to pull a Richard Nixon by withdrawing and declaring "victory".

Read this definition carefully and see if the image of Little Toe doesn't immediately pop in your head:

wikipedia: Passive Agressive

Passive-aggressive behavior refers to passive, sometimes obstructionist resistance to authoritative instructions in interpersonal or occupational situations. Sometimes a method of dealing with stress or frustration, it results in the person attacking other people in subtle, indirect, and seemingly passive ways. It can manifest itself as resentment, stubbornness, procrastination, sullenness, or intentional failure at doing requested tasks. For example, someone who is passive-aggressive might take so long to get ready for a party they do not wish to attend, that the party is nearly over by the time they arrive.
Someone who is passive-aggressive will typically not confront others directly about problems, but instead will attempt to undermine their confidence or their success through comments and actions which, if challenged, can be explained away innocently so as not to place blame on the passive-aggressive person.
In some instances the passive-aggressive person will solicit the confidence of others as to their ability to perform duties, and then purposely sabotage those duties through procrastination or mishandling responsibility. Subsequent demands for performance are laid aside with claims of interference by the demanding parties or some other condition outside the control of the passive-aggressive's influence, when in fact the delays and poor performance are due to the passive-aggressive's internal perception that to perform the task at another's demand is a demeaning insult to them. The omission of performance leaves the passive-aggressive person in control of the situation, and allows that person to continue the aggressive behavior toward others. These behaviors can persist even if it means personal loss to the passive-aggressive person, i.e. job loss or loss of esteem by others.

LittleToe

Here is my first post on this subject in which I inject the philosophical reasons one cannot tolerate certain things and why those things might require ridicule.

While I applaud the moral perogative to be intolerant to certain actions that bring a toll of human suffering, I still contest the use of such means as ridicule.

Respect, Love and hate are not real. They are attitudes and emotions caused by values.

While I agree with you that they are attitudes and emotions, that doesn't make them any less "real". I do see what you're trying to say regarding them having physical outcomes, but I think you're being too narrow with your definitions again. "Life" is real, but it's only observable by activity. Some would argue that "faith" is real by the same token (hence James comments).

On a similar line of enquiry, how would you define the difference between the "real" world and the laboratory?

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/real

AuldSoul

Terry: Respect, Love and hate are not real.

Er. Um. Heh-heh. Okay.

Well, in my opinion you just stripped away any ounce of credibility for your viewpoints on this subject right there. You obviously suffer under the illusion that the only things that are real are the things that are tangible. You truly do require a clean room for your concept of fact. The funny thing is, you likely pity me. Tsk.

If 99% of the world sees a stop sign and you don't, who isn't in touch with reality? Obviously, the 99% of the world that didn't see the world the way you see it.

See (another English lesson) the way language works is based on general agreement as to meaning. It is a consensus device for communication. If the dictionary defines fact one way, and science defines fact another, the smaller group (scientific community) must yield to the conception of the larger group in all arenas beyond scientific arens for productive communication to occur.

Even if science strongly believes its definition to be more correct and really badly wants everyone else to adopt their view, their use of the language is only serviceable within a scientific milieu. Criticizing the rest of the English speaking world for its use of a word outside a scientific context is at once egoistic and obstructive to communication. Pedantic, if you will. Well, pedantic...even if you won't.

AuldSoul

Terry

A fact is something that is actual, that exists, that is real. There is no requirement for you to ever express your love for you to actually (factually) love someone. But how you make someone else believe something that only actually exists in your head is something you will have to figure out on your own, I'm afraid. There is no good "Clinically Proving Love for Dummies" book as far as I know. If you find one, pass the tip along.

You are very confused and this demonstrates exactly why.

A value which is not followed by an action which express it is no value at all. Think: deadbeat dad. The dad holds the idea in his head that he "loves" his children but he just won't write a check to feed or clothe them.

You persist in placing an undemonstrated value (a potential) on the same equal footing as a demonstrated value (an actual).

That is like writing a check for a million dollars and giving it to me. If I believe you have the money in the bank to back it up I'll feel and act as though I am rich! Guess what? Unless and until that check actually clears the bank there is nothing ACTUAL about my being rich.

LittleToe

Do you mean like when someone claims they have the upperhand in a debate, answering the questions in the debate, while intentionally setting aside which ones don't suit them?

Thanks for the mirror, but I'm afraid it doesn't appear to be pointing at me. I'll stand corrected if it's scientifically verifiable by a reasonable number of people, though, as I'm willing to change my opinion on things when presented with reasonable proof contrary to my belief...

katiekitten

Passive aggressive? Did you even bother to look that one up after you read it on this mornings "phrase for a day" sheet of toilet roll?

ROFLMAO!!!!

Love and Hate are real. So real that people die all the time from one or the other. (thinks - battered partners, ethnic cleansing, football violence etc etc)

Havent read the whole thread, but I agree with the general 'tolerance' LT was originally promoting.

Terry

While I agree with you that they are attitudes and emotions, that doesn't make them any less "real".

Please explain why you put that last word in quotation marks, then? Hmmmm?

LittleToe

Merely as a form of emphasis. Would you rather I bolded it?

Your pedanticism is only a distraction from the real issues in this debate.

Intolerance - a new breed of ex-JW

Share this