mitchellmckain wrote:A bully is someone who uses some advantage of power, either physical ability or the shere numbers of a gang to lord it over other people with threats and fear as his tools to push people around.
What the hell is this power that I am supposed to have and what are the threats that I am making and what is it that you have to fear from me?
Frankly this seems a lot more to me like the bully and his gang are whining and complaining about the one little pip squeak who refuses to fear them and refuses to be pushed around by their threats. I take the tactics of rhetoric constantly used by atheists and turn them back on the atheists and they hypocritically act like such behavior is their right alone.
I was not raised chrisitan, so I have little doubt that in many ways you are more Christian than I will ever be. Instead I was raised with these abomnable tactics my whole life.
So you can either drop them or have them used against you and that is the only choice I will give you.
Keep The Reason wrote:From gary:gary_s wrote:I could be wrong, but I sense that this may be something that has plagued Mitch for a long time and he may have something even deeper that is the cause of it. But I'm not psychiatrist, so I'm not qualified to make such assertions. I've just seen a lot of bullies and it always seems like every bully has a reason why they are a bully.
From MM in reply:mm wrote:I was not raised chrisitan, so I have little doubt that in many ways you are more Christian than I will ever be. Instead I was raised with these abomnable tactics my whole life. So you can either drop them or have them used against you and that is the only choice I will give you.
Rian wrote:Keep The Reason wrote:gary_s wrote:Mitch often has profoundly insightful things to say ...
Well, honestly, I don't promote effective messages coming from theists.
I thought this was an important thing to highlight and comment on. Gary, this is an attitude that I think is very important - to seek truth itself, no matter from what "side". I've learned from atheists over the years, as well as Christians, because I'm open to looking for truth, wherever it comes from.
KTR, I think you're selling yourself short here, and I hope that you'll change.
ps - however, and no insult intended at all, what I have learned from Christians is deeper and far more important.
(and I hope you can see what I mean by no insult - what I mean is that, generally speaking, although atheists and Christians have many values in common, they also value some things that are different, and in my life, those different things are far deeper and more important.)
Rian wrote:KTR, I think you're selling yourself short here, and I hope that you'll change.
gary_s wrote:I think perhaps he was commenting more on the fact that he doesn't value what the religious say quite often because of flaws in their argument.
KTR wrote:Offhand, I don't consider their arguments to be of any huge value (they certainly lack coherency and any ability to demonstrate their claims), though I am the first to acknowledge that humans need mythology to help them and inspire them (we also need art, poetry, literature, etc).
gary_s wrote:Yeah, I think he's admitting (unknowingly) that he's been on the receiving end of bullying his whole life. If that is so, then there's no surprise he's such a bully.
Mitch wrote:...this ad-hominem diversion into talking about this or that persons character just doesn't interest me.
Mitch wrote:...I am afraid that it is all too obvious to me that they are nothing but total idiots with delusions of being professionals like scientists and psychiatrists. No real scientist or psychiatrist would fabricate fantasies like this...
...The ridiculous habits of black and white thinking by fundies that use such simpleton categorizations is a total distortion.
Mitch wrote:I learned that what was important was WHAT people communicate and not how.
mitchellmckain wrote:gary_s wrote:Yeah, I think he's admitting (unknowingly) that he's been on the receiving end of bullying his whole life. If that is so, then there's no surprise he's such a bully.
I think this proves quite soundly your habit of fabricating things with no basis in reality. Is this the habit of people who cannot face the truth, and so they just have to start making stuff up?
This is good explanation why this ad-hominem diversion into talking about this or that persons character just doesn't interest me. It amounts to people imagining that they have the authority or ability to analyze and improve upon the character of other people. The kind of people they usually keep company with might buy into this nonsense, but I am afraid that it is all too obvious to me that they are nothing but total idiots with delusions of being professionals like scientists and psychiatrists. No real scientist or psychiatrist would fabricate fantasies like this and pretend they are real.
My parents both graduated in psychology and I have known the real thing from the wannabes since I was in kindergarten. They cerainly were not perfect, but I have met enough other parents to have no end of thanks that my parents were not like them. No Dr. Mundo was far more on target with his comment about not everyone being so lucky as me.
This is not about good upbringing and bad. The ridiculous habits of black and white thinking by fundies that use such simpleton categorizations is a total distortion. What it is about is different subcultures, where people just have different ways of communicating with each other. I remember this good friend from graduate school from Vermont who really opened my eyes to this. At first we did not get along and his ways of talking seemed quite rude to me, but we eventually became best friends, and I learned that what was important was WHAT people communicate and not how.
Keep The Reason wrote:But MM likes to add insult to that, so he's really off my "wow" radar (I don't put people on ignore-- that's too childish for me. I might ignore what they say, but I don't block their very words. If I did, calling other people out on being close-minded or intolerant would stick in my throat. It's hypocritical, disingenuous, and without honor-- and MM has me on Ignore which I find all sorts of amusing).
I see what you're saying, but there was something there that we don't have here, and that's personal interaction, so that makes it harder. If you didn't have time and personal interaction, I don't know that you could have worked things through.mitchellmckain wrote: What it is about is different subcultures, where people just have different ways of communicating with each other. I remember this good friend from graduate school from Vermont who really opened my eyes to this. At first we did not get along and his ways of talking seemed quite rude to me, but we eventually became best friends, and I learned that what was important was WHAT people communicate and not how.
I agree that words are very, very powerful. To share one example, angry words are like hitting nails into a board; you can always apologize and remove the nails, so to speak, but the holes are still there. But the problem is that there are some people out there who use feeling insulted as a control thing, and they shouldn't be encouraged in this unhealthy attitude. The vast majority of people aren't this way, and I think that you have to give people a HUGE amount of time before you make a decision on this, but I think that sometimes this is the case. We might disagree here.Gary wrote:My answer is that yes, any time you make a statement that another find offensive, you should accept responsibility for that statement and at the very least state that no offense was intended (if it wasn't) and apologize, and perhaps try to discuss what your statement means. If your opinion is still the same, and quite often it will be, I think it is fine to continue to hold that opinion, but to at least acknowledge the offensive nature of it, to own it, that is to say. I think we all likely hold insulting and offensive opinions of others. I think it is disingenuous to claim that an opinion is not offensive when someone is telling you flat out that it is. I can't even count the number of times I've seen this kind of standoff. People just don't always understand the power of their words.
I would say that I'm so, so sorry that I hurt them, and do all I could to comfort and help them, but to me, an apology means that the person has done something intentionally wrong, so I wouldn't apologize if I felt I hadn't done something intentionally wrong. But that's perhaps just the way we use those words in our family. I think that it's important to own your own words and behaviors, but I also think it's unhealthy to own someone else's issues in a way that is co-dependent, or whatever other word you want to use. That is bad for both people, because it stops them from owning their behavior. Do you see what I mean?I think that if you truly hurt someone's feelings, intentionally or not, then you already know the answer. Let me put it this way; if you said something in a completely benign way to one of your children and to them it sounded like a hot poker right in their eye and they broke down and cried because of it, would you apologize?
Then I need to try to word things better to avoid that, now that I understand that better (that people are taking something that I thought was clear a different way). And I can certainly say I'm sorry for hurting them, but I won't take something back that I think is valid and within the standards of this forum, because I think there are some people here that are capable of using the insult thing as a control mechanism, and I don't think it's right or good to let them do that.Actually I think you have it backwards, Rian. I think you need to be more precise. I think the problems often arise out of generalized statements that can capture people in a net that you may not have intended. As I said in an earlier post, if you say something general and a room full of people hear it and it has the potential to relate to all of them, but you only meant one of them, you have just insulted all of them whether you meant to or not.
And here is an example of something that I think you could word a little better (the "if you want to do this, you need to do that" thing).Well, this is one of those unintentional things I spoke of. I'm certainly not in the business of managing people or policing people. If I do say something like this, it's mean only as a suggestion of one way to deal with it. If you don't like my suggestions, feel free to toss them out with the garbage and forge your own path. So long as the ultimate goal is achieved, it matters little to me how it is achieved. And to be frank, I'd rather you did it your way and not my way because it will be yours and you will own it much better.
I can accept responsibility for my comments and own them, but I can also choose to NOT accept a response that I think is controlling and wrong. Again, this will probably be rare, but I've found out the hard way that it is certainly something that is done. Do you see what I mean? What do you think?Rian wrote:But where does this stop? A person can feel insulted continually; should the other person be continually apologizing? Where is the line drawn?Gary wrote:That's an easy one; it stops when you are willing to accept responsibility for your comments and own them. When you are willing to accept that someone else's perception of what you said doesn't match your own perception and that's OK. You just have to take their word for it.
gary_s wrote:I do not like the ignore button at all. If I had my own forum, I would disable it. Ignoring someone with whom you have a disagreement NEVER leads to a resolution; it only postpones a possible resolution or escalation. Sometimes a cooling off period is a good idea, but to decide to ignore someone indefinitely is to sweep the problem under a rug. It may allow for fewer arguments, but it forever eliminates the possibility of true reconciliation and it limits what you may learn about others and yourself.
If you consider the example I gave rian of the fellow that I had a bad influence on some years ago. Had he simply ignored me there would have been many bad outcomes. First, we worked on a team together, so the teamwork would have suffered dearly. Also, I would never have come to understand his perspective on how we worked together, which was not manager/employee, but rather professional/craft. We complimented one another very well when we worked together. Apart, we were each less capable. So I am forever grateful that he spoke up and did not hold his tongue. After I made amends, I counted him among my close friends. We didn't always agree, but I learned a new respect for him and he for me. He became far more open and helpful and I became far more supportive of him. It was perhaps one of the most important cross roads of my life, what some might call a religious experience. Because of him, I became a better person.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests