Total Posts:4|Showing Posts:1-4
Jump to topic:

Dear bsh1 (On Trump #1)

A1tre
Posts: 223
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2016 10:44:07 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
I would like to give my opinion on the reactions to a recent post of yours on the topic of Trump.

At 6/3/2016 4:57:37 AM, bsh1 wrote:
Intro

This is going to be part of a series of 4 posts on Donald Trump, GOP nominee for US President. The other three will be: Temperament, Policy + Governance, and Violence + Race-Baiting. These posts are not about Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders, and I would ask that you confine the discussion to Trump himself (I don't want to compare the candidates in this thread). I would also ask that--as I realize this is a controversial topic--we stay polite and considerate throughout the dialogue.

You wrote an excellent piece of critique on Trump. I think your effort has a value for everyone no matter who they support. You make an honest attempt to push our view of reality in a truthful direction. Anybody who is serious in their support of Trump should be able to bring up valid arguments for why your concerns are false. If they are able to then your critique helped then show the legitimacy of their candidate, if not then maybe they should rethink their position.

As I see it, there are those who value truth even if it conflicts with their previously held beliefs, and there are those who fall in love with a candidate and try to justify their stance with emotionally appealing one-liner-statements no matter how inaccurate they may be.
Both types of people can be found supporting each candidate.

If your goal is to find the truth because you believe it is best to vote according to the truth, then you will value rational arguments. The problem is that many people flat out reject the possibility that they might be wrong, it's a basic feature of our human psychology and arises when we are not taught to think critically.

Many of those commenting on your post do not care for an honest search for truth because the are absolutely sure that they are on the correct side. Their objective is not to refute your claims with arguments. They see your post simply as a further attempt to make their candidate look bad and hence their reaction is to try and make him look good again. Btw this goes for all candidates and for all controversial issue for that matter.

We may have different opinions here, but I must say I think you are wrong to engage with them at the lengths you did. They managed to derail the entire discussion, doing so was their intention all along.

At 6/3/2016 6:57:31 AM, bsh1 wrote:
At 6/3/2016 6:53:39 AM, thett3 wrote:
Or would you rather "agree to disagree"?

Thett, we can agree to disagree, and you can go to hell. I cannot take this site anymore.

I very much hope you don't give up on this website, we need people like you here who are willing to strive for the truth. When it comes to controversial issues make sure you have found an honest opponent before you engage in an extensive conversation.

I can't wait for the next parts of of your series, rock on!
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,285
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/4/2016 3:43:13 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/4/2016 10:44:07 AM, A1tre wrote:
I would like to give my opinion on the reactions to a recent post of yours on the topic of Trump.

At 6/3/2016 4:57:37 AM, bsh1 wrote:
Intro

This is going to be part of a series of 4 posts on Donald Trump, GOP nominee for US President. The other three will be: Temperament, Policy + Governance, and Violence + Race-Baiting. These posts are not about Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders, and I would ask that you confine the discussion to Trump himself (I don't want to compare the candidates in this thread). I would also ask that--as I realize this is a controversial topic--we stay polite and considerate throughout the dialogue.

You wrote an excellent piece of critique on Trump. I think your effort has a value for everyone no matter who they support. You make an honest attempt to push our view of reality in a truthful direction. Anybody who is serious in their support of Trump should be able to bring up valid arguments for why your concerns are false. If they are able to then your critique helped then show the legitimacy of their candidate, if not then maybe they should rethink their position.

As I see it, there are those who value truth even if it conflicts with their previously held beliefs, and there are those who fall in love with a candidate and try to justify their stance with emotionally appealing one-liner-statements no matter how inaccurate they may be.
Both types of people can be found supporting each candidate.

If your goal is to find the truth because you believe it is best to vote according to the truth, then you will value rational arguments. The problem is that many people flat out reject the possibility that they might be wrong, it's a basic feature of our human psychology and arises when we are not taught to think critically.

Many of those commenting on your post do not care for an honest search for truth because the are absolutely sure that they are on the correct side. Their objective is not to refute your claims with arguments. They see your post simply as a further attempt to make their candidate look bad and hence their reaction is to try and make him look good again. Btw this goes for all candidates and for all controversial issue for that matter.

We may have different opinions here, but I must say I think you are wrong to engage with them at the lengths you did. They managed to derail the entire discussion, doing so was their intention all along.

At 6/3/2016 6:57:31 AM, bsh1 wrote:
At 6/3/2016 6:53:39 AM, thett3 wrote:
Or would you rather "agree to disagree"?

Thett, we can agree to disagree, and you can go to hell. I cannot take this site anymore.

I very much hope you don't give up on this website, we need people like you here who are willing to strive for the truth. When it comes to controversial issues make sure you have found an honest opponent before you engage in an extensive conversation.

I can't wait for the next parts of of your series, rock on!
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
Axonly
Posts: 1,802
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/6/2016 12:07:14 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/4/2016 10:44:07 AM, A1tre wrote:
I would like to give my opinion on the reactions to a recent post of yours on the topic of Drumpf.

At 6/3/2016 4:57:37 AM, bsh1 wrote:
Intro

This is going to be part of a series of 4 posts on Donald Drumpf, GOP nominee for US President. The other three will be: Temperament, Policy + Governance, and Violence + Race-Baiting. These posts are not about Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders, and I would ask that you confine the discussion to Drumpf himself (I don't want to compare the candidates in this thread). I would also ask that--as I realize this is a controversial topic--we stay polite and considerate throughout the dialogue.

You wrote an excellent piece of critique on Drumpf. I think your effort has a value for everyone no matter who they support. You make an honest attempt to push our view of reality in a truthful direction. Anybody who is serious in their support of Drumpf should be able to bring up valid arguments for why your concerns are false. If they are able to then your critique helped then show the legitimacy of their candidate, if not then maybe they should rethink their position.

As I see it, there are those who value truth even if it conflicts with their previously held beliefs, and there are those who fall in love with a candidate and try to justify their stance with emotionally appealing one-liner-statements no matter how inaccurate they may be.
Both types of people can be found supporting each candidate.

If your goal is to find the truth because you believe it is best to vote according to the truth, then you will value rational arguments. The problem is that many people flat out reject the possibility that they might be wrong, it's a basic feature of our human psychology and arises when we are not taught to think critically.

Many of those commenting on your post do not care for an honest search for truth because the are absolutely sure that they are on the correct side. Their objective is not to refute your claims with arguments. They see your post simply as a further attempt to make their candidate look bad and hence their reaction is to try and make him look good again. Btw this goes for all candidates and for all controversial issue for that matter.

We may have different opinions here, but I must say I think you are wrong to engage with them at the lengths you did. They managed to derail the entire discussion, doing so was their intention all along.

At 6/3/2016 6:57:31 AM, bsh1 wrote:
At 6/3/2016 6:53:39 AM, thett3 wrote:
Or would you rather "agree to disagree"?

Thett, we can agree to disagree, and you can go to hell. I cannot take this site anymore.

I very much hope you don't give up on this website, we need people like you here who are willing to strive for the truth. When it comes to controversial issues make sure you have found an honest opponent before you engage in an extensive conversation.

I can't wait for the next parts of of your series, rock on!

Support
Meh!