Are we still able to debate fairly?

[Spirit Wind 7]

We need to remember violence is really going backward. I winder if parliament no longer wants dissent, debate is over. But it also means we can easily become more communistic rather than be following God. The God, Creator I believe is pure love, which means justice and much more.
But the Creator is not human, but Spirit. Who isn't into human ways that bring us down. Which bear do we feed. Love, or hate.

Do we teach children to love themselves? That they are beloved also by their Creator? When grounded in love one sees the world
in a more loving way and that moves into behaviours that are more healthful. It's a two way street.
It may sound fanciful but I've seen it at work.
People who are attacked are more apt to attack, or go silent and too compliant. I don't follow the Bible is anything violent.
It's not God's way. Putin's war is an ego war.. Selfish idea he can bring back an extinct empire. For his own egotistical conquest.

Remember dictators are selfish and are so afraid of being deposed and losing power. The more we ae told to be quiet and not speak our minds
the closer we are to losing our freedom . Be awake. Remember the Old Testament is about Speaking Up.

I sure hope the dark ages of being a species does not come back. Growing up up in the Spirit requires love, examples and stick at it ness.

Love and prayers for the world .. lets throw that High Positive Energy out there.
Spread the word... love .. is on!

 

[jimkenney12]

The world is becoming more fascist, not communist. Who is telling us to be quiet?

I agree. We need to teach and show children they are loved so they can show love to others. We need to model freedom from the power of fear through trust in God and God's gifts within us or accessible to us.

 

[Northwind]

Anonymity on social media and the continuing creation of new slurs develops poor habits for social interactions and influences people not using those slurs. Our reflex actions are shaped by what other people do.

I agree with this to a point. It is too easy though to blame social media. Sure, it's one part of the equation. It's not everything. I remember hearing a talk or podcast or radio program some time ago that spoke of how we are seeing a decrease in empathy in society. We have more opportunities to be "self-sufficient" with ATMs, self-serve gas pumps, internet banking etc. We don't have to interact with cranky bank tellers, gas station attendants or post office clerks anymore. Those small interactions helped us build some social skills. Add in a pandemic and I believe we're seeing the lowered levels of empathy come to fruition. This seems to contribute to the inability to disagree well.

There are cameras everywhere, 24x7 news sites hungry for a sound bite. And people sharing it all.

Doesn't mean there is more violence.

It does mean we are more likely to perceive there is more.

I agree with this up to a point too. Violence is not just physical. It's also verbal and emotional. It seems there is more bullying in conversations or disagreements. Going back to the reduction of empathy, there is also more self-centredness and lashing out when feelings get hurt or when someone doesn't get what they want. Or just when they disagree. The overuse of the word "woke" is one example of shutting down a different opinion with a label.

But it also means we can easily become more communistic rather than be following God.

Maybe we need more "commune-istic" these days. We have less of a sense of community and more sense of individualism.

Remember dictators are selfish and are so afraid of being deposed and losing power. The more we ae told to be quiet and not speak our minds
the closer we are to losing our freedom

There sure seems to be a rise in authoritarian leadership and people who value that. This is scary. Silencing dissent is very dangerous. I guess that goes to my thinking/reflecting about whether we can disagree and still use our manners.

 

[Waterfall]

I'm hearing more and more about the increase in violence being tied to mental health issues, but I do remember years ago being taught in psychology that this is a fallacy. We were taught those with mental health issues are NOT violent against others.
So I do wonder about a social media influence that shifts the blame on the homeless and mentally ill.
I may be paranoid, but it just seems there are dark influences out there to accomplish this rash of stabbings throughout our country to create discontent and fear. With many of the media sites with all of young peoples info being haplessly exposed, it wouldnt take much to blackmail young people into criminal behaviour. IMO.

 

[Northwind]

We were taught those with mental health issues are NOT violent against others.

Generally people with mental health issues are more likely to be victims of violence rather than perpetrators.

 

[Waterfall]

Generally people with mental health issues are more likely to be victims of violence rather than perpetrators.

Or doing harm to their self.

 

[Northwind]

Or doing harm to their self.

Yes that too

 

[ChemGal]

I'm hearing more and more about the increase in violence being tied to mental health issues, but I do remember years ago being taught in psychology that this is a fallacy. We were taught those with mental health issues are NOT violent against others.

I think with trying to break some stigmas, things swung too far. We went from most people who have a mentally illness are not violent (similar to people who are mentally well) to make statements like "myth - people who are mentally ill are not violent" (I have seen this numerous times)
We absolutely do know that there are people who have mental illness who have committed violence.
Some violence does have connection to the mental illness.
Some people with a mental illness would be violent, with or without it.
It's more difficult to really get the stats of how mentally well someone is, and how mentally well they were when doing a violent act and then combing all of those instances of everyone into clear accurate statistics.
Some people do try, substance abuse appears to be an important factor, Mental illness and violence: Debunking myths, addressing realities

 

[Northwind]

This is a discussion about the ability to debate fairly. It is not about mental illness and addiction.

So are we too polarized to debate fairly? Have we lost our manners? Is there any hope for us?

 

[ChemGal]

I just watched an interesting documentary with that title ( in German). They were looking at how people today seem to tend to have extreme positions and the tendency of families and friendships breaking up over issues like the vaccinations. They had a media specilist and a communications psychologist commenting. One interesting comment with regards to social media and internet in general, was:
Today, scrolling through the social media and the internet for half an hour, one sees a multitude of small and larger conflicts. The social media are living off polarizing to get reactions. They aim at existing archaic instincts in us.

And:
Todays world has never been like this before. We suffer of a constant overdose of world events which constantly confront us with large and small ideologies. Having just browsed through the internet with it’s ongoing aggressive discussions, one carries that constant irritation into one’s own daily life.

A democracy lives off conflicting opinions and debates and requires active tolerance of that tension between them. Only in a dictatorship there is no conflict, because one has to believe and take what is ordered.

There also was an interesting survey they did: they asked Germans : Can one today speak freely of one’s political opinion?
Interesting was the statistics. In the 1950 ties, about 58% said yes. The numbers rose to 78% between the 1960 ties and into the 80 ties, fell to 66% in 2011 and is now in 2021 at 45%. And that despite the fact that Germany is not a dictatorship and every citizen has still the right to free speech. The reason for that perception, so they suggested, was the high publicity through the internet. While in past years, anything said at the pub only stays within a small circle, today, everything is at risk of being put on the internet being scrutinized by others.
( interesting here, too, - my opinion- that the same one who fear that judgement are likely the ones doing it themselves to others)

Solutions to learn to actively learn better debate:
- Imagine there is a human being at the other end of sending the comment
-learn to hold your breath, hesitate and think first, then send your second thought and not your first

Any more suggestions?

Going back to this, with a lot of the extremism. It's one thing to debate by taking a stance and making arguments for it. Often times though with decision making, there can be a middle ground, or a large decision can be broken up into multiple smaller ones with some of those going one way and others the other way.

There seems to be a lot of all or nothing thinking lately. Someone who disagrees with a particular policy is suddenly seen to be against an entire party as an example.

 

[Spirit Wind 7]

We have left people out in various ways, or left them in turmoil Teasing can do this if a child is not grounded and is still in flux as to their loyalties are and who is safe. Every violent incident should be looked at from both the victims' view and the perpetrator's view. There are reasons people go off the deep end.
Can we change enough so that doesn't happen? I hope so. I am sure God is on that side

Also I believe that 5G and 6G coming are factors in our behaviour. When we up the ante on electricity we have to absorb those new waves and
our bodies take time to adjust to that extra radioactivity. There are so many satellites throwing 5G at us from outside, plus what we have here,, like across the street. It's a 4 trillion dollar business, so we look at the health issues last. Not smart. They are also damaging children whose brains are still developing.
All water based plants and animals are affected by 5G and will be by 6G.

The last two years governments have sent kids small devices that helped with learning, but the consequences for their health is a big question.
Plus I got an email that many of those devices had trackers and worse could hear what was going on. That is a threat in itself to democracy and fair debate must be a part of the democratic way of life.
Very often those who want all the power have poor self esteem. Some think they are so amazing they have little concern for others.

 

[JayneWonders]

One of the challenges is written text, whether email, chat or forums.

It takes longer, requires more effort , and more skill to discuss topics, pick up nuances.

In workplace emails, i was taught that if it gets to 3 emails, time to pick up the phone. Why? It would be easier to understand what was going on, less likely to drive discord

We don't do that here. So....things build or go back/forth.

In addition, in debates in person, i can choose who to engage with. Here, the ignore feature is our tool, or just stepping past.

 

[Mendalla]

When we up the ante on electricity we have to absorb those new waves and
our bodies take time to adjust to that extra radioactivity.

Just to clarify, 5G is not "radioactivity" it is radio waves. Radioactivity is the particles emitted from decaying unstable atoms. Of these decay products, only gamma rays are.on the electromagnetic spectrum and they are at the opposite end from radio waves, along with x-rays. In the usual diagrams of the spectrum, gamma rays are far to the right of visible light, radio waves are far to the left. Gamma rays are short wavelengths, radio waves are long wavelengths.

Other decay products, like alpha particles, are high speed protons or similar, not photons, so not even considered part of the spectrum.

Yes, to address this to the topic, using correct scientific and technical terminology matters in debates. Too often, a term like "radioactivity" is bandied about incorrectly to raise alarm or out of ignorance. Debating well requires correct information and using facts. Appealing to feelings rather than reason is another problem in online discussion.

 

[Luce NDs]

When a radio is active ... is it ethereal radioactivity? Thus rackets in the great unknown that is out there ... the buzz penetrates!

 

[Luce NDs]

I recall reading in my text on developmental psychopathology that some mindsets have trouble determining the difference between "I" and "You" ... thus the disturbance between the subjective excesses causing failure of the objective after violent discussion; relabelled as argumentative as the myth of mind is disposed of ... and there reason for penetration ends ... as no one wishes to get into dead stuff that is innate material.

Can one read into the Book of the Dead? That is prone to argument for sure! There the lighter portion of communication is extinguished ... bestialized?

With prime words all will be denied when queried about it later ... CON'd science into subtleties? Very near to mythincal domains ... you cannot see it from where you're at! Realism just will eliminate the item of essence ...

Reconsider that buzz in Aeries ... especially at night ... base condition! There it rests as remnant of the day!

 

[jimkenney12]

I believe we can still debate respectfully, but it is harder work.

I like JayneWonders workplace rule about 3 emails. I will keep that in mind.

If I notice a series of three posts with someone else with no apparent evolution of the discussion or start of resolution, I will try to review the whole discussion. If I do not see a path to resolution, i will try to declare my concern and cease to participate.

 

[Luce NDs]

God, I love discussions that erupt on improbabilities when we keep in mind that there are abstract potentials ... defines what's out there and non Familia in types of cultures ... Jah Zus did you see that take flight?

 

[Luce NDs]

I believe we can still debate respectfully, but it is harder work.

I like JayneWonders workplace rule about 3 emails. I will keep that in mind.

If I notice a series of three posts with someone else with no apparent evolution of the discussion or start of resolution, I will try to review the whole discussion. If I do not see a path to resolution, i will try to declare my concern and cease to participate.

Open ended reason?

And recall that in all likelihood that many words pass like Aeries and ethers containing esters, alcohol and other intoxicating vapours! There are some things that shouldn't be breathed in too heavily ... like lead tetra ethyl ... it is heavy metal, may block mythical neurons ... in polar situations tyrants will declare them a waste ... thus trumped ... perhaps! Not necessarily ...

 

[Mendalla]

What is resolution in some of the debates we have here, though? A lot of our discussions are exchanges of opinion and the resolution is just that no opinions change, we just learn a bit more about what other folks here think. This isn't like a Oxford debate where there will be "winner" based on how they presented their case.

In fact, I don't think most of what happens here qualifies as "debate". It is more discussion and exchange of ideas. Rarely do we see people presenting a case and then carefully defending it as in a proper debate.

 

[Luce NDs]

Does one need to be a winner to copy on common sense as reason to learn?