Are your political beliefs better than mine?

[Pinball Wizard]

Well, that's how I would direct an argument.

Of course, having control over the organization and delivery of words in a political conversation does afford a sense of tectonic honesty.



Maybe you were being made an example of what not to do dear lilly...

Try harder next time, to conform to our ideas.

Only then you will be better.

 

[Elvis]

You both fail to understand what several others here have understood.

Stop thinking about this as an equation, or something to disprove.

I also never said 'on sentence'... I said one reply. Really, the problem at hand is neither of you can read my entire post without jumping to assumptions first.

Lilly made an example out of herself for not being able to follow VERY simple instructions. No one put a gun to Lilly's head to post in this thread, nor did anyone force her to not follow directions... she did both on her own free will.

This has nothing to do with confomity... quite the opposite actually.

 

[theSoulfulMofo]

ok, i'll give it a shot... good thing, because i don't have to argue or defend my point, but just give one reply, right?

My beliefs (political, spiritual, what-have-you) grant me a direction toward an ideal state of the world I would like to live in.

I assume that all of you have beliefs that construct your ideal states of reality.

That's great. All these ideas in our heads, we're just always "dreamin' out loud"...

Better yet, let's exchange ideas and work together in making a better world. Although we may have different ideas about HOW to get there, at least we're starting somewhere (here in FYM) to get to that PROMISE LAND....

 

[Pinball Wizard]

This has nothing to do with confomity... quite the opposite actually.

Interesting how you've labelled some as jumping to conclusions, when you yourself have prematurely made assumptions without reading, or comprehending the content of responses.

Stop thinking about this as an existential investigation with some ethereally applicable benefit... your attempts to frustrate the charged denizens of this forum has reached its peak of redundancy. The simple fact is, you designed a question with an intent that failed because it was executed poorly. The intent? Left vague because of the process... most likely to emphasize brevity, and a clarity of argument. A stipulation against the defending of your position? Admirable... but lack of accountability is dangerous, and can lead to Austrian Gubernatorial-elects.

If this question has nothing to do with conformity (spelled with an r in most dialects) then obviously you didn't closely read my "better than" proclamation...

Judging by my mechanics discourse... methinks I read YOUR posts in a thorough enough manner...

 

[Dreadsox]

If I understand this correctly, now that I am out of my Rush Limbaugh haze, is that the posts were taken out of this thread and put into another.

If this is so isn't this Censorship? Isn't this using control, that others in the forum do not have, to do two things:

a) make a public example of a respected member of the community?
b) control your own thread, something none of us are afforded the ability to do?

If I am wrong sorry...maybe I am in a haze....but it does not seem fair.

 

[Tizer]

If this question has nothing to do with conformity (spelled with an r in most dialects)

*sigh* what actually compels people to do that!?

 

[Pinball Wizard]

Right on the money Tizer! If there's a discrepancy in such a menial issue of mechanics, then who knows how pervasive the lapse is!

You are commended.



Yours

Forever,

****
fetchez la vache.

 

[Klaus]

I'd like to know if Dread was right in his post:

If I understand this correctly, now that I am out of my Rush Limbaugh haze, is that the posts were taken out of this thread and put into another.

If this is so isn't this Censorship? Isn't this using control, that others in the forum do not have, to do two things:

a) make a public example of a respected member of the community?
b) control your own thread, something none of us are afforded the ability to do?

If I am wrong sorry...maybe I am in a haze....but it does not seem fair.

 

[IWasBored]

I had this long drawn out reason why mine are better than yours
but it just doesn't matter... too you. So it's a mute point ... therefore I deleted it.

moot point!






my political views are the same as yours in the sense that they're mine and not necessarily identical to anyone elses...sure there are some areas that overlap, and depending on who YOU are these areas may be great or small. kind of what headache said, and there are plenty things i think we'd disagree with, so there ya go.

 

[indra]

Tell me why your political beliefs are better than mine.

I notice that the title of this thread is "Are your political beliefs better than mine?" but I am only going to respond to the actual request of this thread, which is quoted above.

Because you request that I tell you why my political beliefs are better than yours, you have already acknowledged that they (my beliefs) are better than yours. Now a bit of extrapolation tells me that since my political beliefs are better than yours, I am also better than you.

Therefore, my political beliefs are better than yours because they are mine and I am better than you.

There you go.

 

[sue4u2]

Originally posted by IWasBored

moot point!


edit for the last time:
I have lost both my ability to spell and edit this weekend.

 

[Liesje]

Um....since thinking of an answer to this is more fun that writing my paper:

Are my political beliefs better than yours? Yes, of course! Mine are the best because only I know and understand me and what I believe in as well as I do, so my political beliefs are the best because yours might be good, but they don't take into consideration MY beliefs and values, my past present and future. Besides, why would I want to believe in something that wasn't the best? MINE are the best b/c they're MINE and I like 'em dammit!!

MINE MINE MINE ME ME ME MINE BEST BEST ME I MINE MINE!!!

 

[Elvis]

I appreciate those that are following the directions of the original post within this thread.

 

[LCK]

Dear Elvis,

My political views are better than yours because I haven't taken the time to get to know you before judging you. What you get from me therefore is a knee-jerk reaction to what I have perceived, rightly or wrongly, from you in a handful of online posts. I haven't sat down with you face to face and asked you not only what you believe but why you believe as you do. I have judged you according to my own standards, based upon my own intolerances, biases, and ethnocentricity. Perhaps I've even taken it one step lower and judged you on heresy and gossip, perhaps someone has told me "That Elvis is such a fanatic/ crackpot/ troublemaker" etc that I have judged you even before you've opened your mouth. I would not tolerate the same treatment from you, however. I expect you to sit there in slack jawed wonder enraptured by my every word, allow me to have my say uninterrupted and then alter your own viewpoint accordingly to align with mine. Anything less and I will get all drama queen on you and highlight all your shortcomings, relevent to the topic at hand or not, and ridicule the idiocy inherent in your inferior beliefs in a flame war hissy fit. I won't stop to think that had I given you half a chance I could have learned something from you, perhaps even made a friend.

Seriously speaking, I don't believe my views on politics (or religion for that matter) are better than yours, even not knowing what yours are. Having studied history rather extensively, I can see that intolerance is the key to an oppressive and/ or stagnant society. Intolerance breeds censorship and conformity while it stifles rational debate, independent thought, and creativity. Without knowing your political views or you knowing mine I like to think we could talk to each other, listen to each other. Change is what keeps our world moving forward and change does not come about from the complacency of like minded people mouthing like minded jargon. Change comes first from necessity and then the ideas borne from that necessity and...I'm rambling now, you said one post right? ttfn

"Once you have a belief, it influences how you perceive all other relevent information" Robert Jervis, political scientist. 1985.

"From the earliest time of my studies, I set up for myself the rule that whenever I discern a sounder opinion in any matter whatever I gladly & humbly abandon the earlier one, for I know that what I have learned is but the least in comparison with what I do not know" Jan Hus, Czech priest and professor, (1369-1415), a significant influence on Martin Luther.

"I still haven't found what I'm looking for"- U2. 1987.

 

[Elvis Presley]

Interesting how you've labelled some as jumping to conclusions, when you yourself have prematurely made assumptions without reading, or comprehending the content of responses.

Stop thinking about this as an existential investigation with some ethereally applicable benefit... your attempts to frustrate the charged denizens of this forum has reached its peak of redundancy. The simple fact is, you designed a question with an intent that failed because it was executed poorly. The intent? Left vague because of the process... most likely to emphasize brevity, and a clarity of argument. A stipulation against the defending of your position? Admirable... but lack of accountability is dangerous, and can lead to Austrian Gubernatorial-elects.

If this question has nothing to do with conformity (spelled with an r in most dialects) then obviously you didn't closely read my "better than" proclamation...

Judging by my mechanics discourse... methinks I read YOUR posts in a thorough enough manner...

Thats worth another read....

 

[IWasBored]

Originally posted by IWasBored

moot point!


edit for the last time:
I have lost both my ability to spell and edit this weekend.

i have no ability to spell either, and i'm glad you're laughing and didn't take my rant smilies seriously, cos i really wasn't horribly pissed off.

 

[Elvis]

Interesting how you've labelled some as jumping to conclusions, when you yourself have prematurely made assumptions without reading, or comprehending the content of responses.

Stop thinking about this as an existential investigation with some ethereally applicable benefit... your attempts to frustrate the charged denizens of this forum has reached its peak of redundancy. The simple fact is, you designed a question with an intent that failed because it was executed poorly. The intent? Left vague because of the process... most likely to emphasize brevity, and a clarity of argument. A stipulation against the defending of your position? Admirable... but lack of accountability is dangerous, and can lead to Austrian Gubernatorial-elects.

If this question has nothing to do with conformity (spelled with an r in most dialects) then obviously you didn't closely read my "better than" proclamation...

Judging by my mechanics discourse... methinks I read YOUR posts in a thorough enough manner...

You're assuming that I haven't read or understood what you or others have said.

You're also assuming that there is an intent.

The point of this thread is not to analyze why I started it, but to analyze the 'question' and respond with an answer.

Are you frustrated?

 

[nbcrusader]

I think many are frustrated with the grading of our responses.

 

[Pinball Wizard]

You're also assuming that there is an intent.

Are you frustrated?

You haven't presented anything vexing as of yet...

Intent is an investment. It requires thought and preparation, and a regard for the context within which an idea or question is presented. Intent requires pre-meditation... and a subsequent provocation to acquire a desired result.

Assumptions removed: you claim that there is a reasonable answer since you've labelled some statements as converse. By seeking a favourable answer you've not only attached value to a desired response, but... believe it or not... you've imposed purpose on your thread; Intent has been issued.

However, after submitting various messages that enforce the direction of the thread (and the misdirection of others), you destroy its purpose by claiming that there is no intent. Since there's no intent, there's no plausible answer within the realm of reason, art, philosophy, or any other form of human communication; all respective forms have scripts that engage and evaluate by intent. It is by default, not applicable.

It seems this has been quite the precarious venture for yourself. Creating a thread without considering the consequence, direction, or purpose, whilst at the same time violating your own forum code of conduct to emphasize a point that truly has no point. I applaud the convolution that you may have tried to achieve? but I can?t assign obligation to you. That would be assumptive and imparting responsibility?

All things considered, you've only afforded credence to my previous statements, and further monotony with the perpetuation of an argument lacking content... it is simply a contradictory and inflammatory exercise that revolves in circles. Alas, not any longer. There?s nothing to refute unless you back-pedal further from your already questionable position.

Are my political beliefs better than yours?

? there's no need to respond with an answer if the question doesn't exist.


Elvis, you've been evicted.



Next.

 

[Elvis Presley]

 

[Elvis]

Are my political beliefs better than yours?

? there's no need to respond with an answer if the question doesn't exist.

The question exists, it's the opening of this thread.

Again, I didn't ask for you or anyone else to try to dispute the question - I'm very well aware of how it can be disputed. By attempting to prove this to myself and others, you're really not achieving anything besides floating your own boat.

I asked for a reply to a specific question, not a debate about the question. Really, even for you, could that be so hard to respect?

I'm the property owner here.

 

[Elvis]

Keep your reply strictly about your beliefs.

Pinball... what about this line didn't you understand?

 

[hiphop]

If I don?t know yours, I can?t argue about why I think mine are better.

There?s also a difference in what term you use, imho the term political matters. If it was about spiritual beliefs, there is nothing to argue about - even if I?d know about your spiritual beliefs.

On the other hand, for the sake of possibilities, there are politicians who may assume their political beliefs are better than yours because they?re more powerful than you.

 

[LCK]

I asked for a reply to a specific question, not a debate about the question....I'm the property owner here.

1. Surely you realized in your initial post that the very nature and wording of your question inherently invites debate. What you're asking people to do is essentially like asking philosophers to respond without using reasoning.

2. Property owner yes, but I learned in kindergarten that even when my friends came to play in my sandbox, I still had to play by the same rules of fairness as I did in their sandboxes.

A number of people have attempted to post thoughtful responses but it doesn't seem any of them are to your liking. Perhaps you see it as a simple question but it isn't - its like one of those "If a tree falls in the woods...." questions that is impossible to answer directly or conclusively. I sense several people are getting frustrated- perhaps you can explain, without the impatience I'm sensing, what it is you want from us or what is the point you are trying to get across?

 

[Lilly]

get out the lifejackets.

Tell me why your political beliefs are better than mine.

posted, actually originally from this thread, but removed and placed into this thread

I posted this with a specific purpose. Besides, I didn't ask 'are they better', I asked to tell me why they are better.

contradiction n. : a statement or phrase whose parts contradict each other

originally posted by elvis
The point of the thread is to answer the 'question', not to write a response and then delete it

the title of this thread
Are your political beliefs better than mine?

originally posted by elvis
Actually, there are some excellent answers here..... some very well thought out answers

originally posted by elvis
Tell me why your political beliefs are better than mine.

originally posted by elvis
You're also assuming that there is an intent.

The point of this thread is not to analyze why I started it, but to analyze the 'question' and respond with an answer.

originally posted by elvis
By attempting to prove this to myself and others, you're really not achieving anything besides floating your own boat.

originally posted by elvis
I'm the property owner here.

 

[Elvis]

1. Surely you realized in your initial post that the very nature and wording of your question inherently invites debate. What you're asking people to do is essentially like asking philosophers to respond without using reasoning.

2. Property owner yes, but I learned in kindergarten that even when my friends came to play in my sandbox, I still had to play by the same rules of fairness as I did in their sandboxes.

A number of people have attempted to post thoughtful responses but it doesn't seem any of them are to your liking. Perhaps you see it as a simple question but it isn't - its like one of those "If a tree falls in the woods...." questions that is impossible to answer directly or conclusively. I sense several people are getting frustrated- perhaps you can explain, without the impatience I'm sensing, what it is you want from us or what is the point you are trying to get across?

1. Some have used reason in their replies.

2. Don't let that statement be taken out of context... He said "Elvis, you've been evicted.", and I simply responded with a factual statement.

The people that have posted thoughtful 'answers' I appreciate... as that is all I asked for. It's a simple question, with endlessly complex possibilities for answers. This wasn't intended to be a debate, an argument, or a way to make an example out of anyone.... sadly though... some people have pushed it those directions.

To answer a question... to just give your thoughts in response... without a pursuing debate... why is that so hard for some? why must they dig deeper in an attempt to undermine something without ill intent?

Have you never asked a question of someone just to see what response they would give?

 

[LCK]

1. Some have used reason in their replies.

2. Don't let that statement be taken out of context... He said "Elvis, you've been evicted.", and I simply responded with a factual statement.

The people that have posted thoughtful 'answers' I appreciate... as that is all I asked for. It's a simple question, with endlessly complex possibilities for answers. This wasn't intended to be a debate, an argument, or a way to make an example out of anyone.... sadly though... some people have pushed it those directions.

To answer a question... to just give your thoughts in response... without a pursuing debate... why is that so hard for some? why must they dig deeper in an attempt to undermine something without ill intent?

Have you never asked a question of someone just to see what response they would give?

Okay, in regards to someone saying you've been evicted, I concede your property owner comment was appropriate and I took it out of context. Sorry.

In regards to those replies you say have used reason, perhaps if you highlighted a few people's responses favourably then others would have a clearer picture as to what you're looking for.

It is hard for some (most?) because you have asked a question which inherently invites debate. On this point I'm not budging (lol, and when I decide not to budge hell can freeze over around me). Unless a person is completely arrogant and narrow minded in his/ her convictions, he/she cannot simply categorically claim his /her beliefs are superior to yours without even knowing what your beliefs are.

In a nutshell you are asking rational people to respond to an irrational question. Paradoxically, in order to give you the rational response you desire, they must think irrationally to comply.


And yes, of course I ask questions. But I don't try to control the responses.

 

[Angela Harlem]

Elvis, threads derail all the time. Even with requests not to by the author. You don't have to refer to others in 3rd person to make a point either. Not undermining you, quite the contrary as I'd say this to anyone

 

[TheGenericPoet]

when I decide not to budge hell can freeze over around me

I'll vouch for that!

 

[Elvis]

In a nutshell you are asking rational people to respond to an irrational question. Paradoxically, in order to give you the rational response you desire, they must think irrationally to comply.

People have options....
to answer the question.... or not to answer the question.

To not answer the question is as much of a response as someone who answers it.