homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   »   » Oblivion   » An echo chamber of like-minded individuals (Page 2)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: An echo chamber of like-minded individuals
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621

 - Posted      Profile for Jamat   Author's homepage   Email Jamat   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:

In most cases, we end up observing communities of more-or-less like-minded people who happily talk to each other. But react against other-minded individuals who cross their path. Does it have to be thus? Can't things run along a different, better, path?

Good OP, kind of like self review. I have noticed that ultra conservative Christians tend to push off fairly quickly and that there is a core political and religious temperature which is left liberal leaning. I personally enjoy the interactions but it can get pretty boring when everyone agrees for instance that Brexit was crazy or Trump is a dangerous lunatic. But the play aspect of the ship and the community support aspect is bloody brilliant.

--------------------
Jamat ..in utmost longditude, where Heaven
with Earth and ocean meets, the setting sun slowly descended, and with right aspect
Against the eastern gate of Paradise. (Milton Paradise Lost Bk iv)

Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
moonlitdoor
Shipmate
# 11707

 - Posted      Profile for moonlitdoor   Email moonlitdoor   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:

originally posted by Eutychus

All views are welcome – orthodox, unorthodox, radical or just plain bizarre – so long as you can stand being challenged

That's fine as a statement of the ship's official position but I don't think it's an accurate description of how Purgatory works in practice.

I don't agree at all with Mr Cheesy that a person with a wild view won't experience a lack of welcome, I'd say they are quite likely to be called to hell and given a good kicking.

That's not to say that a person cannot avoid such a fate. But there's a huge double standard. A person posting from a popular point of view has a wide variety of posting styles open to them from polite reasoned argument to wild unsubstantiated ranting, whereas a person posting from an unpopular point of view has to do so in a mild unchallenging style, or have a thick skin and not mind the abuse they are going to get.

--------------------
We've evolved to being strange monkeys, but in the next life he'll help us be something more worthwhile - Gwai

Posts: 2210 | From: london | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081

 - Posted      Profile for Eutychus   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
This debate has so far discussed the theoreticals rather than the specifics of this or any other forum. The venue for criticisms applying to the Ship in particular is the Styx.

--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy

Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by moonlitdoor:
But there's a huge double standard. A person posting from a popular point of view has a wide variety of posting styles open to them from polite reasoned argument to wild unsubstantiated ranting, whereas a person posting from an unpopular point of view has to do so in a mild unchallenging style, or have a thick skin and not mind the abuse they are going to get.

I think there's some inevitability about a "double standard". If most people accept some basically common ideas then they can cut a lot of corners in their argument. On most Christian sites no one would need to justify why they consider what the Bible says to be important with every post, but someone who wants to use other sources (eg: Book of Mormon or the writings of Emanuel Swedenborg) is likely to have to spend a considerable amount of time to justify why others there should consider their views. Going through the gauntlet of having to justify core assumptions before you can get to discuss what you really want to talk about isn't something everyone wants to do.

--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.

Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
moonlitdoor
Shipmate
# 11707

 - Posted      Profile for moonlitdoor   Email moonlitdoor   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I would like to clarify that I did not mean any criticism of they way the ship of fools is run or hosted. Certainly the hosts allow posting from popular and unpopular points of view equally.

I was referring to how accepting or otherwise the ship as a community of posters is, but my apologies if that is not appropriate for this topic.

--------------------
We've evolved to being strange monkeys, but in the next life he'll help us be something more worthwhile - Gwai

Posts: 2210 | From: london | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081

 - Posted      Profile for Eutychus   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I think the thinking is that we are trying to stay with the general here; the topic is broader than the Ship or indeed the Internet.

There's nothing wrong with raising Ship-specific issues, but they belong in the Styx rather than here - and are not confined to challenges to Hosts & Admins!

Of course, there's nothing wrong either with taking the general discussion here and applying it, in the privacy of our own minds, to our behaviour here.

[ 04. October 2016, 09:07: Message edited by: Eutychus ]

--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy

Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
A Feminine Force
Ship's Onager
# 7812

 - Posted      Profile for A Feminine Force   Author's homepage   Email A Feminine Force   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
"The organism always punishes the deviant."

It's the nature of social organisms to expel, neutralize or marginalize the irritant.

Having spent most of my life as the social irritant, it's my observation that no, there is no other way to go about it.

I observe that people dislike discomfort. They dislike feeling challenged, even if no direct challenge has been offered. Not everybody is looking for a new and better way of seeing life and operating within it. They are most of all looking for appreciation and affirmation of their state of being.

Most are quite content to operate within the paradigm that provides them with the greatest sense of "normal" or "success"(whatever that may be), and which shields them from the greatest amount of discomfort.

I've observed that a cognitive disconnect must reach a critical mass of agony before one is ready to surrender the belief, behaviour, idea, way of being or seeing, that is causing the grief.

I think this is the animal survival instinct operating in human nature. I think the reasons for this are neurological - the organism seeks homeostasis.

Like calls to like and birds of a feather flock together.

And while opposites attract, it's only a matter of time before the polarity of the attraction flips, and the differences that were once attractive are the things that eventually repel.

These are just my observations.

Although I would love to find a more inclusive way of being in community, I believe this would require such an effort on the part of the members of the community that they would be exhausted before the results could be enjoyed.

AFF

--------------------
C2C - The Cure for What Ails Ya?

Posts: 2115 | From: Kingdom of Heaven | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Jamat
Shipmate
# 11621

 - Posted      Profile for Jamat   Author's homepage   Email Jamat   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by moonlitdoor:
But there's a huge double standard. A person posting from a popular point of view has a wide variety of posting styles open to them from polite reasoned argument to wild unsubstantiated ranting, whereas a person posting from an unpopular point of view has to do so in a mild unchallenging style, or have a thick skin and not mind the abuse they are going to get.

I think there's some inevitability about a "double standard". If most people accept some basically common ideas then they can cut a lot of corners in their argument. On most Christian sites no one would need to justify why they consider what the Bible says to be important with every post, but someone who wants to use other sources (eg: Book of Mormon or the writings of Emanuel Swedenborg) is likely to have to spend a considerable amount of time to justify why others there should consider their views. Going through the gauntlet of having to justify core assumptions before you can get to discuss what you really want to talk about isn't something everyone wants to do.
Moonlit Door's point is correct though. If you are as I am, fascinated by dead horses and always tempted to kick them, You realise You have to be pretty thick skinned but I appreciate this and also the way hosts monitor the discussions.

--------------------
Jamat ..in utmost longditude, where Heaven
with Earth and ocean meets, the setting sun slowly descended, and with right aspect
Against the eastern gate of Paradise. (Milton Paradise Lost Bk iv)

Posts: 3228 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged
moonlitdoor
Shipmate
# 11707

 - Posted      Profile for moonlitdoor   Email moonlitdoor   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:

originally posted by Alan Creswell

I think there's some inevitability about a "double standard". If most people accept some basically common ideas then they can cut a lot of corners in their argument.

Yes I agree with that. But I was meaning unpopular in a stronger sense than just 'in a minority'.

For example Swedenborgians might be in a smaller minority in a group than political conservatives but still find themselves more accepted. It depends not only on how much of a minority they are in, but also on how the majority feel about the minority view.

--------------------
We've evolved to being strange monkeys, but in the next life he'll help us be something more worthwhile - Gwai

Posts: 2210 | From: london | Registered: Aug 2006  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by moonlitdoor:
It depends not only on how much of a minority they are in, but also on how the majority feel about the minority view.

There are a few dynamics in action, and those dynamics are probably different for different communities.

So, a community centered around a common ethos of wanting intelligent discussion would be accepting of someone expressing a minority view that is well argued. They may not convince anyone in the majority camp, but by expressing themselves in a manner that fits the ethos of the community they are accepted. That same community may reject someone who expresses a view many of them hold in a manner that is wilfully dismissive of the opinions of others and fails to engage in the discussion.

Another community may be centred around a particular viewpoint, and anyone who does not hold that viewpoint could be rejected regardless of how they express it.

--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.

Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
que sais-je
Shipmate
# 17185

 - Posted      Profile for que sais-je   Email que sais-je   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
In most cases, we end up observing communities of more-or-less like-minded people who happily talk to each other. But react against other-minded individuals who cross their path. Does it have to be thus? Can't things run along a different, better, path?

I'm no good at debating - my mind runs off at a tangent too quickly. But I've learned a lot from SoF. I have a colleague with strong views (on many things and, alas, a need to inform me of them) but he says he doesn't waste his time reading things he doesn't agree with, or if he does, it is to expose their errors. That seems rather pointless to me - getting a sense of how other people see and feel the world appeals much more.

Mind you, I'm glad I'm just an atheist - I sense that a Jehovah's Witness might feel less welcome.

Thanks, everyone.

--------------------
"controversies, disputes, and argumentations, both in philosophy and in divinity, if they meet with discreet and peaceable natures, do not infringe the laws of charity" (Thomas Browne)

Posts: 794 | From: here or there | Registered: Jun 2012  |  IP: Logged
Odds Bodkin
Apprentice
# 18663

 - Posted      Profile for Odds Bodkin   Email Odds Bodkin   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
In most cases, we end up observing communities of more-or-less like-minded people who happily talk to each other. But react against other-minded individuals who cross their path. Does it have to be thus? Can't things run along a different, better, path?

That's pretty normal activity; we prefer to be around people who share our tastes, values and interests. People who seek out disturbance are usually quite childish (wanting noise and excitement) more often than truth-seeking...although they will often claim to be the latter.

Speaking as a newcomer here it is interesting spotting whether the dominant clique are Corbyn-supporting liberals, conservative Christians, or somewhere in-between. [Big Grin]

Posts: 28 | Registered: Sep 2016  |  IP: Logged
SusanDoris

Incurable Optimist
# 12618

 - Posted      Profile for SusanDoris   Author's homepage   Email SusanDoris   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
My tech expert has been here today and made it possible for me to watch that Prof Brian cox video, so I will do so asap. However, I am having a bit of difficulty with my software and the settings of IE, but I should be able to watch it.

--------------------
I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

Posts: 3083 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
SusanDoris

Incurable Optimist
# 12618

 - Posted      Profile for SusanDoris   Author's homepage   Email SusanDoris   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I have watched the Prof Brian Cox video. he was rather waffly, I think, seldom completing a sentence, but he was being interviewed and not giving a lecture, and I almost always like what he has to say ...

I am pleased to say that as far as I could tell he did not compromise his own scientific credentials by allowing his words to be interpreted as meaning that any religious belief was based on fact.

P.S. What was the slogan on his shirt?! His hair is a bit different from what it used to be, isn't it?! [Smile] The picture was large and clear enough for me to be able to peer at that!! [Smile]

All I have to do now is to get the Tech chap back to re-set the Ie advanced options so that the S/N software works as I'm used to. *sigh*

[ 10. October 2016, 12:38: Message edited by: SusanDoris ]

--------------------
I know that you believe that you understood what you think I said, but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.

Posts: 3083 | From: UK | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
catnip
Apprentice
# 18638

 - Posted      Profile for catnip   Email catnip   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:

In most cases, we end up observing communities of more-or-less like-minded people who happily talk to each other. But react against other-minded individuals who cross their path. Does it have to be thus? Can't things run along a different, better, path?

As a new poster here and having had a unwelcoming challenge to my very first post--much to my surprise--I would like to say something here. As a liberal leaning Christian, I had carefully evaluated this list as a lurker off and on and felt I would be a comfortable fit for this group. I might have even previously subscribed and even posted. People here had appeared to be very kind, gently inclined, well read and the discussions not too heated. In all my careful perusal of discussions here, I had not seen such a dismissive post as I received. I wasn't troll-like. I had not failed to keep the Commandments in mind, it was simply a minor difference of opinion.

Generally, I think that if people are not welcoming the group will die a slow death. I suggest that new people should be treated gently and welcomed before rejecting them for good reason--being new is no reason to reject a person. If they aren't a fit they will wander off on their own or they may learn how to present themselves more in line with the group.

Posts: 17 | From: Oklahoma | Registered: Aug 2016  |  IP: Logged
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468

 - Posted      Profile for Golden Key   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
catnip--

Hi, and welcome to the Ship.

If you're talking about your post on the "Male language, male Jesus" thread, and mean the response that's a few posts down, I don't think it was meant as dismissive--just as disagreeing.

Purgatory is where we discuss and argue about things. With anything you post, there's apt to be someone who knows something about it, or has an opinion on it.

Good luck! [Smile]

--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")

Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Catnip,

As GK says, Purgatory is for discussing and arguing. Any poster should be ready to face challenge. And as far as you being new, I can say for myself that I do not always look to see how new someone is unless their post throws up red flags.
Those of yours I've read do not do so.
It is difficult to read tone in a text only medium as well.

--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou

Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged
BroJames
Shipmate
# 9636

 - Posted      Profile for BroJames   Email BroJames   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
catnip--

Hi, and welcome to the Ship.

If you're talking about your post on the "Male language, male Jesus" thread, and mean the response that's a few posts down, I don't think it was meant as dismissive--just as disagreeing.

Purgatory is where we discuss and argue about things. With anything you post, there's apt to be someone who knows something about it, or has an opinion on it.

Good luck! [Smile]

GK, your link is only to the post icon, and not to any post or thread.
Posts: 3374 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I think catnip is probably talking about this thread.

It is quite hard to talk about this example that our friend has introduced without getting personal, so let's not do that.

But it is perhaps something else we could or should discuss; namely the tendency of communities to have hidden "doorkeepers" (I'm not sure if that's the correct phrase) which intentionally or not keep people from participating when strictly speaking they have no bearing on the running of the organisation or whatnot.

The most obvious example I can think of is how many employers judge prospective new employees based on inflationary educational standards, which evidence suggests are not needed to actually perform the job well. So we have the common, but ridiculous, situation whereby someone giving an interview expects more than they themselves bought to the role when they joined.

I'm not sure how one breaks out from that mindset.

--------------------
arse

Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128

 - Posted      Profile for Baptist Trainfan   Email Baptist Trainfan   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I think that, in most communities, there are indeed self-appointed doorkeepers who see it as their role to keep the community "true to its spirit". This may well be an unconscious position; these folk are probably not the official leaders (although they may have been); their perception of the group's values may be nothing more than their own perception. But there is no doubt that their attitude will contribute to the welcome (or lack of it) given to a newcomer.

Equally there will be some folk who lean over backward to welcome outsiders, ignoring obvious differences and reaching out a hand of friendship. It could be that these people are so criticised by their peers for "not upholding our standards" that they eventually leave in disgust.

Or am I just talking about churches? [Devil]

Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330

 - Posted      Profile for mr cheesy   Email mr cheesy   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
I think that, in most communities, there are indeed self-appointed doorkeepers who see it as their role to keep the community "true to its spirit". This may well be an unconscious position; these folk are probably not the official leaders (although they may have been); their perception of the group's values may be nothing more than their own perception. But there is no doubt that their attitude will contribute to the welcome (or lack of it) given to a newcomer.

Yes, but this illustrates why I didn't like the term I introduced - I'm not really talking about people, I'm talking about systematic issues in organisations which end up excluding new people. For example, I'm thinking more about the sense of "institutional racism" whereby there is a norm that black people are overwhelming excluded from various positions and careers rather than that individual racists are taking it upon themselves to be bouncers.

If someone can think of a better term that doesn't make us automatically think of individuals, that might be helpful.

quote:
Equally there will be some folk who lean over backward to welcome outsiders, ignoring obvious differences and reaching out a hand of friendship. It could be that these people are so criticised by their peers for "not upholding our standards" that they eventually leave in disgust.

Or am I just talking about churches? [Devil]

Again, without taking forward your point about individuals (who, I think, are just actors participating in a system that allows/encourages/supports certain behaviours over others) I suppose one could argue that as well as systematic biases which restrict entry, there might also be internal pressures acting in the opposite direction. So maybe the end result is not so much that an organisation holds these accepted-and-not-discussed biases, but the overall impact of biases acting in different directions.

--------------------
arse

Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128

 - Posted      Profile for Baptist Trainfan   Email Baptist Trainfan   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Yes, I see what you are getting at.
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
A Feminine Force
Ship's Onager
# 7812

 - Posted      Profile for A Feminine Force   Author's homepage   Email A Feminine Force   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
All of this being said, the mechanics of this type of group dynamic function on a subconscious level. It's a type of group-level gestalt.

If we were to even recognize this dynamic in the group, this would be a major step forward in changing the group dynamic.

But to change the group dynamic, this would require a major shift in self-recognition and introspection on an individual level, and a commitment on the part of every individual to lovingly call others to account.

I believe this is what early Christian communities set out to do.

But how long can a loving community support the social irritant and discomfort of those who simply can't or won't "get with the program" - no matter how loving and inclusive that program might be?

ISTM the cry for acceptance in the social milieu is the projection of an inner need for self-acceptance. The world acts as both the movie screen and the mirror. It's sometimes hard to tell when it's functioning as one or the other.

AFF

--------------------
C2C - The Cure for What Ails Ya?

Posts: 2115 | From: Kingdom of Heaven | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468

 - Posted      Profile for Golden Key   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by BroJames:
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
catnip--

Hi, and welcome to the Ship.

If you're talking about your post on the "Male language, male Jesus" thread, and mean the response that's a few posts down, I don't think it was meant as dismissive--just as disagreeing.

Purgatory is where we discuss and argue about things. With anything you post, there's apt to be someone who knows something about it, or has an opinion on it.

Good luck! [Smile]

GK, your link is only to the post icon, and not to any post or thread.
Thanks and apologies, BroJames. This should work:

"Male Language, Male Jesus" thread (Purg).

As I understand it, catnip was referring to her first post on the Ship, and that's it, per her post list.

--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")

Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
catnip
Apprentice
# 18638

 - Posted      Profile for catnip   Email catnip   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
catnip--

Hi, and welcome to the Ship.

If you're talking about your post on the "Male language, male Jesus" thread, and mean the response that's a few posts down, I don't think it was meant as dismissive--just as disagreeing.

Purgatory is where we discuss and argue about things. With anything you post, there's apt to be someone who knows something about it, or has an opinion on it.

Good luck! [Smile]

No worries! It wasn't that thread or the other one someone guessed it might be. I find it amusing and rather sweet that there is a guessing game as to which post it was. I decided that I would ignore it and it would fall into the archives. We can leave it there and hope for a fresh start and a better day. The point being to be friendly first and then disagree.

I've never met two people who agreed in all ways on either religious or political subjects and disagreement is what fuels these discussion groups and keeps them interesting.

Thank you!

Posts: 17 | From: Oklahoma | Registered: Aug 2016  |  IP: Logged
catnip
Apprentice
# 18638

 - Posted      Profile for catnip   Email catnip   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
quote:
Originally posted by BroJames:
quote:
Originally posted by Golden Key:
catnip--

Hi, and welcome to the Ship.

If you're talking about your post on the "Male language, male Jesus" thread, and mean the response that's a few posts down, I don't think it was meant as dismissive--just as disagreeing.

Purgatory is where we discuss and argue about things. With anything you post, there's apt to be someone who knows something about it, or has an opinion on it.

Good luck! [Smile]

GK, your link is only to the post icon, and not to any post or thread.
Thanks and apologies, BroJames. This should work:

"Male Language, Male Jesus" thread (Purg).

As I understand it, catnip was referring to her first post on the Ship, and that's it, per her post list.

You are right! I did say first post, didn't I? Well, it did begin it. I guess it was really my second, but what matters is that I would rather not make a big fuss about it now and I decided not to then, either.

Oh, dear! I really didn't anticipate the sleuths we have here!
[Eek!]

Posts: 17 | From: Oklahoma | Registered: Aug 2016  |  IP: Logged
Alan Cresswell

Mad Scientist 先生
# 31

 - Posted      Profile for Alan Cresswell   Email Alan Cresswell   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
You didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition?

--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.

Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
A Feminine Force
Ship's Onager
# 7812

 - Posted      Profile for A Feminine Force   Author's homepage   Email A Feminine Force   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
We all know that NO ONE expects the SPANISH INQUISITION!

Shall we arrange for the comfy chair for Catnip?

AFF

--------------------
C2C - The Cure for What Ails Ya?

Posts: 2115 | From: Kingdom of Heaven | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468

 - Posted      Profile for Golden Key   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
No, not the comfy chair!
[Eek!]

--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")

Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
BroJames
Shipmate
# 9636

 - Posted      Profile for BroJames   Email BroJames   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Well, perhaps we should just start with the soft cushions
Posts: 3374 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged
The Om
Shipmate
# 2318

 - Posted      Profile for The Om   Email The Om   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Though is the whole idea of 'debate' universal?

If you pit a university professor against someone who failed school and can barely write, the professor is likely to demolish them in short order. It doesn't mean the latter's views are necessarily invalid, it means the professor has had a lot more practice at building arguments. (the professor might also bring fresh data/evidence of their own - in this case let's assume that they do not).

The equivalent online might be someone who can't type or spell or form coherent sentences - there might be a valid point in there, but they're often dismissed for their appearance just the same as they might be for the clothes they wear in real life.

In Parliament, two sides might have different views A or B but, to some extent, they come from the same background of engaging in debate, argument, etc. They are therefore an elite of sorts.

Previously we engaged such 'professional debaters' to represent our views, but today there is a cacophony of voices and the professionals are cast aside.

So how do we avoid ghettoising into those who can conduct debate and those who never learnt to do so?

Posts: 96 | From: Cambridge | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333

 - Posted      Profile for lilBuddha     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I think the current political situation puts paid to the idea that learned debaters have an advantage. Brexit and Trump demonstrate this exceedingly well.

--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou

Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008  |  IP: Logged
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528

 - Posted      Profile for Lamb Chopped   Email Lamb Chopped   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It depends on your audience. If you have an audience that respects learning, has it themselves, and is willing to listen, then the debater who uses those skills is likely to win (provided other things are equal--such audiences are also more likely to notice if you try a snow job). If you have an audience that is uneducated or emotion-driven or not paying much attention or all of the above, well, the one who yells the loudest, is most amusing or scary, requires the least hard thinking, and appeals to prejudices is likely to win.

--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!

Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
The Om
Shipmate
# 2318

 - Posted      Profile for The Om   Email The Om   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Indeed, and that's the thing. They're different styles of engagement, but they're both engagement, and some might say that neither is better or worse than the other. By focusing on engagement type X (call it 'debate') and not on type Y (could be many things but let's call it 'emotion'), is that not exclusionary?

You'll obviously come off worse if you use technique X to audience Y, or vice versa. So, if we want to get out of our debate-centred bubble, should we move from sharpening our arguments to making better clickbait?

Posts: 96 | From: Cambridge | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528

 - Posted      Profile for Lamb Chopped   Email Lamb Chopped   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Well, Trump clearly has. And IMHO that's the direction almost everybody in public communication is taking. I don't think it's a good thing,* but it's a reality.

* because logic and evidence work better when addressing the real world of Stuff (as opposed to human beings) and trying to do the clickbait approach on something like plans for hurricane clean-up or war strategy is just going to fail. If I'm listening to somebody who actually has plans to do something (anything) in the real world, I'd like to see some evidence that they actually have an approach that would work somewhere other than, say, Twitter.

--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!

Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
Boogie

Boogie on down!
# 13538

 - Posted      Profile for Boogie     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
Well, Trump clearly has. And IMHO that's the direction almost everybody in public communication is taking. I don't think it's a good thing,* but it's a reality.

* because logic and evidence work better when addressing the real world of Stuff (as opposed to human beings) and trying to do the clickbait approach on something like plans for hurricane clean-up or war strategy is just going to fail. If I'm listening to somebody who actually has plans to do something (anything) in the real world, I'd like to see some evidence that they actually have an approach that would work somewhere other than, say, Twitter.

Well said.

--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk

Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged
Odds Bodkin
Apprentice
# 18663

 - Posted      Profile for Odds Bodkin   Email Odds Bodkin   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
It depends on your audience. If you have an audience that respects learning, has it themselves, and is willing to listen, then the debater who uses those skills is likely to win (provided other things are equal--such audiences are also more likely to notice if you try a snow job). If you have an audience that is uneducated or emotion-driven or not paying much attention or all of the above, well, the one who yells the loudest, is most amusing or scary, requires the least hard thinking, and appeals to prejudices is likely to win.

Logos, Pathos and Ethos...
Posts: 28 | Registered: Sep 2016  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools