BF2S Forums Recent events = make me hopeful

Kmarion wrote:

Flaming_Maniac  wrote:

I don't pass judgments on emotions, I pass judgments on actions.

Flaming_Maniac  wrote:

Nothing pisses me off more than when someone hears a story about a brutal murder or rape and acts all sad about it.

Flaming_Maniac  wrote:

An idea of the general line of thought, but to assume posts that you deem out of character are inconsistent (short of CyrusTheVirus style posts) is silly. One of the many reasons party lines are abominable.

I don't label people on party lines. I get impressions from an individuals post history. Clearly you are arguing for the sake of arguing now... and that's the only silly thing here.

I'm only defending my posts by propping them up with my history. Either all my posts are shallow or none are, they are all on the same level.

Kmarion wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Then yes, from the perspective of all of humanity, the Holocaust was an unavoidable, logical outcome. It was going to happen to somebody, somewhere, and it happened to be the Jews in Germany.

Point? Your contention was that because I picked the holocaust as an example because I was trying label you antisemitic.

My comment would be taken as anti-semitic by more than a few people. Putting me in a position to say what you knew my opinion was, but loading it with an extreme situation like that, isn't fair.

Kmarion wrote:

Flaming_Maniac  wrote:

You don't have any?

Of course I do. Like the people who presume to know how a person truly feels about a situation.

You should really try to change that about yourself, it will make you a happier person in the long run.

Kmarion wrote:

Flaming_Maniac  wrote:

There is in expressing fake sympathy. I will only concede some people are better at faking being able to relate and understand that they believe it themselves.

True, especially in politics. But your claim isn't that people are faking, at least not originally. You are now desperately twisting the discussion and back tracking. You said that people shouldn't feel better because there are some kids starving in Darfur. Just because someone isn't looking for things to be depressed about it doesn't make them a fake.

No, my original point was essentially people are faking it and they don't even realize it. Society says "Oh you feel bad for those people, you're a good person," so people open the floodgates to feel better about themselves.

I'm saying people shouldn't kid themselves that the world is changing because the headlines are changing. (back to my first post) Not looking for things to be depressed about doesn't mean they're faking, but looking for all the things that are right in the world while ignoring the bad isn't a good idea.

Kmarion wrote:

Flaming_Maniac  wrote:

So it's my path to choose, but yours is better?

lol@ your feeble attempts to set me up. I've answered this.

You already set yourself up, I don't need to do anything other than show you what is right in front of your nose. You can't pretend to feel that everyone has a individual reactions and individual paths, while at the same time thinking you know best.

Kmarion wrote:

Flaming_Maniac  wrote:

But what is there to talk about when everyone agrees? I can't think of any actual debate threads that are completely one sided, only some news threads, and I highly doubt any of them are particularly interesting past the OP.

Really, what is the point when you truly agree with everyone else? You just sit around, patting each other on the back?

An open discussion about an event does not have to be confrontational. If it comes down to just a bunch of kids making a debate for the hell of it (probably so they can pat themselves on the back) I usually abstain.

A debate doesn't have to be confrontational either, what makes you think that? You of all people know that disagreeing with someone isn't the same as attacking them. I don't think very often a debate is made for the hell of it, though maybe you don't see any debate going on because of your perspective.

Kmarion wrote:

It's boring to be honest. Kinda like the way I am feeling now.

Oh please, you're just becoming increasingly insulting. Go play with your telescope or something.

Spearhead wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

I think people are neither good nor bad, that in a societal sense they are evil. They will always look out for themselves and no one else, unless helping someone else helps them.

I am very sorry to hear you say that.

I would, in all honestly, be thrilled if you could offer any evidence otherwise. A little faith can go a long way.

Spearhead wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

spearhead wrote:

I am very sorry to hear you say that.

I would, in all honestly, be thrilled if you could offer any evidence otherwise. A little faith can go a long way.

I have never been a religious person, ever.  I've only been to church on a few occasions, mostly for someones funeral.  I've been to Jewish synagogues more times than I've been to church, cuz of my friends.

But I do not need anyone to tell me how to think or feel.  When I act sad, I mean it.  And I think its kinda sad how you think people only help others because helping others helps themselves.  And its sad how you think people only "act" sad because society expects them to.  I don't need to offer any evidence.  How could you do that?  Headline : Genuine person really feels sad about dying people in Africa.  lmao.

I meant a little faith in humanity, not religion.

I don't know how you would offer evidence, that's the problem. There is no way to know when people are being genuine, especially if they don't know where society stops and they begin, but it would be really nice to know that somewhere, an act of complete and utter kindness has been made.

Edit:

Spearhead wrote:

I guess what it comes down to, is, do you think someone can be truly selfless?  I do.  Apparently you don't.

It's possible to be faithful but not religious.

Yeah you pretty much nailed it.

Spearhead wrote:

and dude it's happening all around you.  That's the big problem with todays corporate media -- they only report shit that makes stories.  They don't report every little good thing that happens around you.  You have to go out and see it for yourself.

Someone drops his wallet, the guy behind him immediately picks it up and offers it to the man who dropped it, without taking anything.

Why did he do that? Was it because he is truly a good person who believes in doing the right thing, or is it because by doing the right thing, he feels better about himself because he is a good person who believes in doing the right thing.

Spearhead wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Spearhead wrote:

and dude it's happening all around you.  That's the big problem with todays corporate media -- they only report shit that makes stories.  They don't report every little good thing that happens around you.  You have to go out and see it for yourself.

Someone drops his wallet, the guy behind him immediately picks it up and offers it to the man who dropped it, without taking anything.

Why did he do that? Was it because he is truly a good person who believes in doing the right thing, or is it because by doing the right thing, he feels better about himself because he is a good person who believes in doing the right thing.

I'd say people who are dishonest with themselves would be the latter option.

Truly good people see someone else dropping their wallet... and help them.  Like any normal, good person would do.  Are you saying everyone is a sociopath?  Because if everyone did good things just so society would accept them... you'd certainly be implying that everyone lacks the ability to imagine themselves in someone else shoes.

I would say the former are being dishonest with themselves.

Yeah pretty much. I don't think any form of society is really natural, past the size of a tribe/pack whatever. (Dunbar's number, as Ken said) Past that everyone has to a lot of twisting and molding to fit into the civilized world, either consciously or subconsciously.

Modfight!

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

but looking for all the things that are right in the world while ignoring the bad isn't a good idea
.

Its official, FM thinks I'm looking for all the things that are right in the world while ignoring the bad

Dude, I'm offended.  Did you read ANYTHING I wrote?  WOW.  I feel as though I have just wasted a lot of time.  No offense meant.

Last edited by Spearhead (2008-02-23 21:08:33)

Kmarion wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

I'm only defending my posts by propping them up with my history. Either all my posts are shallow or none are, they are all on the same level.

Back to square one I see. No, inconsistently is a real possibility believe it or not.

How can there be no unifying thought process when all the ideas came from one source?

Kmarion wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

My comment would be taken as anti-semitic by more than a few people. Putting me in a position to say what you knew my opinion was, but loading it with an extreme situation like that, isn't fair.

We have both been clear on our intentions here. I wasn't trying to cast you as an antisemitic. How many times have I said that now?

I know you aren't trying to cast me as an antisemitic, but this is not in private. If it was I would have immediately gone to what you have quoted, but it's harder in public. I don't want to open up another front on my flank if I don't have to.

Kmarion wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

You should really try to change that about yourself, it will make you a happier person in the long run.

I am old, yes. However I have been told a whole slew of things would change when I listen to a teenager (awkward years your ass), and very, very few of their projections were realized. I have had it beaten into head by my parents, by the media, by my friends, and by just about every younger person I meet that doesn't meet me through some sort of screening. They all seemed to be so sure they knew about my priorities, my political leanings, my interests, my responsibilities, and how these aspects would change in five years. It was about 90% a load of crap, and because of that I consider the 10% of stuff they were right about to be a coincidence as a result. So you'll have to excuse me when I don't think you will ever be able to tell what will make me happy or not as you "mature".
Unoriginal tbh.

What is it with you and the technique? Do you enjoy arguing my point for me? Maybe we can close this topic and just have you argue both sides.

Beautifully written though, if I do say so myself.

Kmarion wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

No, my original point was essentially people are faking it and they don't even realize it. Society says "Oh you feel bad for those people, you're a good person," so people open the floodgates to feel better about themselves.

I'm saying people shouldn't kid themselves that the world is changing because the headlines are changing. (back to my first post) Not looking for things to be depressed about doesn't mean they're faking, but looking for all the things that are right in the world while ignoring the bad isn't a good idea.

So you get pissed at something they don't supposedly realize they are doing. You pretty much don't listen to anyones advice in your life, why in the hell would they listen to you and your superior knowledge of world atrocities? People have a right to pursue and do what makes them happy. If they need to look for the good in a situation to make them feel better than so be it. It is understandable and it is certainly not your right to decide that for them.

The sheeple don't realize it, but they should.

Whoever said I don't listen to any advice? I just don't hear very much good advice, and the number of trustworthy, competent people I know who are wise enough to give it are few and far between.

People have the right, motivation, and social responsibility to do what makes them happy. If they need to look for the best in the situation to make them happy, they should do it. However if I need to tell them my opinions on how crappy the world is to make me happy, I should also do that.

Kmarion wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

You already set yourself up, I don't need to do anything other than show you what is right in front of your nose. You can't pretend to feel that everyone has a individual reactions and individual paths, while at the same time thinking you know best.

I have not set myself up. People have the right to follow whatever path they want. ... get ready... Even if I don't think it's in their best interest. It's called an opinion. I promise I won't get "pissed off" if you ignore it.

Opinions are great, strong opinions are better, but I don't think I'm going to be swayed by this one.

Kmarion wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

A debate doesn't have to be confrontational either, what makes you think that? You of all people know that disagreeing with someone isn't the same as attacking them. I don't think very often a debate is made for the hell of it, though maybe you don't see any debate going on because of your perspective.

Amazing. The whole point of my statement was to say we don't need to be confrontational. Did you read the entire quote or just pick out random words? "An open discussion about an event does not have to be confrontational. If it comes down to just a bunch of kids making a debate for the hell of it (probably so they can pat themselves on the back) I usually abstain.

What is it with you and the technique? Do you enjoy arguing my point for me? Maybe we can close this topic and just have you argue both sides. After all you don't have a problem amusing yourself. (Better insert --> so people know I'm joking with you)

You said an open discussion does not have to be confrontational. Then you say when a bunch of kids make a random debate for the hell of it...you seperated an open discussion like it was one thing, and a debate like a debate was open discussion's older, hairy, bully of a brother. I'm clarifying that a debate, even a heated one, can still be non-confrontational.

Just because it's non-confrontational doesn't mean it isn't arguing. Nice, kind-hearted arguing, but still glorified arguing.

If there is anyone that could hold an argument with themselves on these forums, it would be me. Sometimes it helps me sleep at night.

Kmarion wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Oh please, you're just becoming increasingly insulting. Go play with your telescope or something.

Rest assured I would be if possible. I'm not being insulting... really .. trust me.

I know, I just had to work in making fun of your cloudy sky somehow.

Okay, well thanks.  I'm glad you read them.  Just when you said that it was kinda surprising, I've gone to great lengths to make that point. 

And no I wasn't offended, lol, sorry.  just kinda shocked.  You're a smart guy, even though we are polar opposites.  On this issue anyway.

Kmarion wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

How can there be no unifying thought process when all the ideas came from one source?

Different state of mind when you post I supposed. People post things out of character depending on their mood. If it goes against the typical trend than it is inconsistent.

As I said I really only post here when I'm in a good mood, for the safety of my mouse/keyboard/monitor. Trying to express your opinions in text is just too frustrating sometimes. That's why I like the smilies.

Even in different emotional states (though maybe not different BAC states), I still think all your opinions can be unified in a clear line of thought. Maybe in different moods someone emphasizes on facet of their views over others, but I really don't think someone can come up with a rational point of view that irrationally clashes with their other rational views.

Kmarion wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

I know you aren't trying to cast me as an antisemitic, but this is not in private. If it was I would have immediately gone to what you have quoted, but it's harder in public. I don't want to open up another front on my flank if I don't have to.

I figured that anyone following this discussion would have picked that up at least by the third time I said it.

Well by now they certainly have. I think this point can die.

Kmarion wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

The sheeple don't realize it, but they should.

Whoever said I don't listen to any advice? I just don't hear very much good advice, and the number of trustworthy, competent people I know who are wise enough to give it are few and far between.

People have the right, motivation, and social responsibility to do what makes them happy. If they need to look for the best in the situation to make them happy, they should do it. However if I need to tell themmy opinions on how crappy the world is, I should also do that.

Of course you should. And they shouldn't get angry with you when you do. To be honest that is the only real divide between us. They have the right to react in a manner that is appropriate to them, you have the right to object also. I just feel in my opinion getting pissed at another persons emotional reaction, whether genuine or not, is silly.

It's not like I'm mad at the particular person, I'm angry at the society that caused the emotional reaction. It really brings to my forethoughts what kind of hellish society I live in where people lie and they don't even realize it, and are in fact required to lie to be accepted by their peers. How are you supposed to find a bright side to a collection of human beings when the group forces these twisted, inane rules and regulations subconsciously on its individuals?

Kmarion wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Opinions are great, strong opinions are better, but I don't think I'm going to be swayed by this one.

My goal is to share, not sway. Make what you will of it.

See, there is no fire in you. I am more apt to listen to someone who would beat the tar out of me to impress their ideas on me because they are so passionate about them, rather than someone who says whatever, do what you want.

Kmarion wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

You said an open discussion does not have to be confrontational. Then you say when a bunch of kids make a random debate for the hell of it...you seperated an open discussion like it was one thing, and a debate like a debate was open discussion's older, hairy, bully of a brother. I'm clarifying that a debate, even a heated one, can still be non-confrontational.

Then you misunderstood what I meant by confrontational. When to opposing views meet they confront each other. They don't need to be harsh attacks. Respect.

Agreed, but it's still arguing. All we're doing here is asserting our opinions on one another, and whenever they conflict, that's arguing. If we all held the exact same views, hive mind style, there would quite literally be no need for this section, just set up an RSS feed.

Kmarion wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

If there is anyone that could hold an argument with themselves on these forums, it would be me. Sometimes it helps me sleep at night.

Try Nyquil.

I'd rather exercise the mind than smack it over the head with chemicals.

Kmarion wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

As I said I really only post here when I'm in a good mood, for the safety of my mouse/keyboard/monitor. Trying to express your opinions in text is just too frustrating sometimes. That's why I like the smilies. wut

Even in different emotional states (though maybe not different BAC states), I still think all your opinions can be unified in a clear line of thought. Maybe in different moods someone emphasizes on facet of their views over others, but I really don't think someone can come up with a rational point of view that irrationally clashes with their other rational views.

You blew it when you said clear line of thought. Emotions will of course influence a persons thought process. It is a proven fact and even used in our court systems.

Influence yes, change completely, no. It's a proven fact by pseudoscience and is complete bullshit 99% of the times it is used in the court system. If someone is not bat shit crazy or under the influence of psychoactive drugs, there is a distinct line of thought that they are responsible for.

Kmarion wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

It's not like I'm mad at the particular person, I'm angry at the society that caused the emotional reaction. It really brings to my forethoughts what kind of hellish society I live in where people lie and they don't even realize it, and are in fact required to lie to be accepted by their peers. How are you supposed to find a bright side to a collection of human beings when the group forces these twisted, inane rules and regulations subconsciously on its individuals?

I presume when you say things like "...and who is an incompetent fool?" that your anger is directed at the individual.

Yeah it is. Incompetence is the other thing that really gets to me, especially when they're in a position of power over me. That anger, however, stems from an almost completely different reason. I find it hard to believe you aren't angered when someone with power over you routinely makes a fool of themselves and yourself.

Kmarion wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

See, there is no fire in you. I am more apt to listen to someone who would beat the tar out of me to impress their ideas on me because they are so passionate about them, rather than someone who says whatever, do what you want.

I have plenty of fire. I just don't demonstrate an overbearing attitude and "beat the tar out of people" to express it. Infact that turns most people off tbh. That's kinda like the religious folks who shove their ideas in your face. It's not going to happen with me. That doesn't mean I am not passionate about my beliefs.

If you don't show it, what's the point? I don't want to listen to a fanatic, but if someone isn't going to go into any lengths to prove themselves to me, why should I listen to them. Conversely, you know how hard headed I am, I like to find someone I can really butt heads with. I know it turns off most people, and most people get steamrolled by, how shall I say it, my overbearing personality. It's worth it though to find those worthy opponents who are quick-minded enough, blatant enough, and have strong enough feelings to really grind logic, ideals, and egos with.

Kmarion wrote:

Flaming_Maniac  wrote:

Agreed, but it's still arguing. All we're doing here is asserting our opinions on one another, and whenever they conflict, that's arguing. If we all held the exact same views, hive mind style, there would quite literally be no need for this section, just set up an RSS feed.

Acknowledged and accepted .

Hooray two points down

Kmarion wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

I'd rather exercise the mind than smack it over the head with chemicals.

Chemicals might be able to fix that urge you have to argue with yourself.

Gnite.

What makes you think I want the urge fixed?

Sweet dreams.

Sweet Lord that took FOREVER to read all of that.

TBH, I agree with BOTH sides of the arguement. 

Jesus.  I'll have to think about this one for a while though.

Spearhead wrote:

5. Writers stike ended.. which means five more episodes of Lost this season.  (Sorry, ok, that ones not too important)

And Prison Break! Yes, the future is looking good so far!