Once Upon A Time...when we were civil
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
31-08-2015, 11:52 PM
RE: Once Upon A Time...when we were civil
(31-08-2015 11:24 PM)The Drake Wrote:  
(31-08-2015 11:09 PM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  Respectfully, I disagree in the strongest possible terms. Yes, the internet has made a great many morons more visible, and allowed more voices to join in all sorts of conversations, but those voices were always there.

As crazy as our political and civil discourse have become in this day and age, our tendency toward idyllic thinking does not conform to the facts. Like per capita crime rates have dropped from the Leave it to Beaver days, yet people think it's now worse because of all the news coverage, similar rules apply to political and social discourse. People can fact-check what you say, now, and this leads to only two categories of troll: the cautious and the busted.

It's too late in the evening, and I'm about to go to bed, so I'm not going to dig it up... but those of you with Google should look into some history websites on political (rancor, lies, smear, and mudslinging) campaigns in the early years of our democratic republic, through some of the more contentious arguments of their day, and the campaigns that went along with them.

Just read some of the essays and OpEds published in papers or spoken by politicians during the collapse of the economy, through the Depression, and on into the New Deal. It will blow your mind, some of the things that they said, in a time when it was unheard of to even swear in public.

I understand your frustration, but calling people morons puts a stop to your argument and is exactly the type of uncivil discourse I was referencing. While your other arguments may be valid, I cannot ascribe to that method.

When someone has provided ample, repeated proof of being a moron and shows not only no inclination to change bust seems unable to recognize the utterly moronic nature of their posts, then frustration sets in among those who actually wish to have constructive, or at least interesting, discussion.

I call the fucking morons as I see 'em.

One thing that would bring up the tone would be to ban these cretins sooner, once they have shown their dishonesty, intransigence, ignorance, and delusion.

Once the toy has lost its squeak, it's time to discard it. Drinking Beverage

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Chas's post
01-09-2015, 03:27 AM
RE: Once Upon A Time...when we were civil
Oh yes, the time when we were all civil, the 20th century. WWI & II, Korea, The Spanish civil war, Vietnam, The Middle East, Falklands, the cold war.....

What planet you living on Drake????

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Banjo's post
01-09-2015, 03:33 AM
RE: Once Upon A Time...when we were civil
(31-08-2015 09:16 PM)The Drake Wrote:  Perhaps I'm being idealistically nostalgic (selective memory ?). But I do remember a time when I could debate the issues of atheism/theology, science/religion, and fact/faith without resorting to the name calling...liberal vs conservative...divisive BS into which THE conversation has degenerated. Issues once debated in a civil manner by great minds have now become petty bickering points in a seemingly endless US vs THEM mentality. Your thoughts and comments, please.

Back in those days theists were treated with some respect. Now if you challenge atheism. Its unlikely you will around for long. Too many people here try to silence the opposition by shaming them with insults. It is hard to talk when you are being booed.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Heywood Jahblome's post
01-09-2015, 03:41 AM
RE: Once Upon A Time...when we were civil
(01-09-2015 03:33 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(31-08-2015 09:16 PM)The Drake Wrote:  Perhaps I'm being idealistically nostalgic (selective memory ?). But I do remember a time when I could debate the issues of atheism/theology, science/religion, and fact/faith without resorting to the name calling...liberal vs conservative...divisive BS into which THE conversation has degenerated. Issues once debated in a civil manner by great minds have now become petty bickering points in a seemingly endless US vs THEM mentality. Your thoughts and comments, please.

Back in those days theists were treated with some respect. Now if you challenge atheism. Its unlikely you will around for long. Too many people here try to silence the opposition by shaming them with insults. It is hard to talk when you are being booed.

Back in the day theists were burning people at the stake! Including theists!

Back in the day Catholics and protestants were fighting in the tens of thousands on Sydney streets. In the 1930's!

Theists used to persecute each other everyday.

Bed honest Heywood. Just for once!

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Banjo's post
01-09-2015, 03:51 AM
RE: Once Upon A Time...when we were civil
(01-09-2015 03:33 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(31-08-2015 09:16 PM)The Drake Wrote:  Perhaps I'm being idealistically nostalgic (selective memory ?). But I do remember a time when I could debate the issues of atheism/theology, science/religion, and fact/faith without resorting to the name calling...liberal vs conservative...divisive BS into which THE conversation has degenerated. Issues once debated in a civil manner by great minds have now become petty bickering points in a seemingly endless US vs THEM mentality. Your thoughts and comments, please.

Back in those days theists were treated with some respect. Now if you challenge atheism. Its unlikely you will around for long. Too many people here try to silence the opposition by shaming them with insults. It is hard to talk when you are being booed.

Like I've tried to ask before, specifically give some context to what "those days" is supposed to mean? Where and in what situation is that?

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-09-2015, 04:07 AM
RE: Once Upon A Time...when we were civil
(01-09-2015 03:51 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  
(01-09-2015 03:33 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Back in those days theists were treated with some respect. Now if you challenge atheism. Its unlikely you will around for long. Too many people here try to silence the opposition by shaming them with insults. It is hard to talk when you are being booed.

Like I've tried to ask before, specifically give some context to what "those days" is supposed to mean? Where and in what situation is that?

When the forum first began the membership was smaller and more close nit group interested in discussion and not circle jerking.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-09-2015, 04:11 AM
RE: Once Upon A Time...when we were civil
(01-09-2015 04:07 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(01-09-2015 03:51 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Like I've tried to ask before, specifically give some context to what "those days" is supposed to mean? Where and in what situation is that?

When the forum first began the membership was smaller and more close nit group interested in discussion and not circle jerking.

How do you know this is the case?

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-09-2015, 04:11 AM
RE: Once Upon A Time...when we were civil
(01-09-2015 04:07 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(01-09-2015 03:51 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  Like I've tried to ask before, specifically give some context to what "those days" is supposed to mean? Where and in what situation is that?

When the forum first began the membership was smaller and more close nit group interested in discussion and not circle jerking.


So, before you joined?

Oh yeah I forgot to mention Ireland and the Catholics and Protestants and many other places. Theists cannot agree on their own religion! And atheists were persecuted!

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-09-2015, 04:20 AM
RE: Once Upon A Time...when we were civil
(01-09-2015 04:11 AM)ClydeLee Wrote:  
(01-09-2015 04:07 AM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  When the forum first began the membership was smaller and more close nit group interested in discussion and not circle jerking.

How do you know this is the case?

I lurked occasionally before I joined. Maybe I am wrong and simply didn't notice all the vitriol.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-09-2015, 04:41 AM
RE: Once Upon A Time...when we were civil
On a discussion board the greatest act of villainy one can achieve is the villainy of intellectual dishonesty. To be intellectually dishonest basically means one knowingly assign more worth to preserving ones current convictions, and subsequently ego, than to be of convictions that more accurately reflect objective reality, but contradict the current one. People exchange ideas to seek the closest position to truth, so to be dishonest is unfair to any who one would engage in discussion.

It's just unfortunate that people sooner perceive villainous intellectual dishonesty, rather than innocent human folly. Once oneself is convinced that the other is a demon, it is of course right to demonise the other; justifiably so, for a wicked person deserves nothing less than contempt.

I think people should be more open to the idea that their immediate perception of someones character is not inherently accurate, and that whether it is accurate or not it is still mostly irrelevant and harmful to conjecture on it along side discussing something.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Gilgamesh's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: