Manifesto, TAKE TWO

[teach]

Read into whatever you want. My comment was soley for Blue. You did not need to respond to me, nor make the assumption that I am dismissing anything just because I choose not to talk about it in detail as you would like to. Rest assured I am not attempting to converse with you, so please don't feel a need to respond to what I say to others with the same comments you use.

 

[AaronAgassi]

--
moderated:

that comment was uncalled for.
--

 

[teach]

Ad Hominem, much?

Yes, that was directed to you. Please, just leave me alone.

 

[teach]

A Latin expression meaning “to the man.” An ad hominem argument is one that relies on personal attacks rather than reason or substance.

 

[Blue Sky]

Aaron, looks like your hot topic turned cold very quickly, I wonder why.

 

[AaronAgassi]

Ad Hominem, much?

Yes, that was directed to you. Please, just leave me alone.

Sure. But that wasn't Ad Hominem fallacy of relevance, because I wasn't countering a rational argument to begin with.

 

[AaronAgassi]

Aaron, looks like your hot topic turned cold very quickly, I wonder why.

It's annoying enough when popular folks down play out problems of loneliness and simply do not relate. And this is to be expected. But when they've got the lonely buying into how simple it's all supposed top be, and even throwing propaganda pep rallies, now that's downright tragic.

But a clue, Blye Sky.

 

[Blue Sky]

Oh Blah Blah Blah, at least in your last post the words were shorter.

 

[AaronAgassi]

How are we doing for intellectual discourse, want2bhapy?

 

[AaronAgassi]

--
moderated:

that comment was uncalled for.
--

No, pay attention moderator. My comment was EXACTLY called for. I was expressing my embarrassment with the juvenile snarky rhetorical formula to which I responded, eg: "My [disparaging] comment was soley for Blue."

 

[AaronAgassi]

It's working fantastic mate, my doorbell rings night and day lol.

Then what are you doing on this forum, gloating?

 

[AaronAgassi]

Who seeks to curtail discussion? What discussion do they seek to curtail? Why? What interests are served? What are the motives? And what propaganda techniques are employed, how and to what effect? What are the social mechanisms manipulated by flamers?

I am always most pleased to discourse with anyone who has shared with me the rare genuine interest. But sustaining conversation requires persistence even in the face of purposeful disruptions and peer pressure by online bullies.

And so, I have invented a virtual drinking game. Here are the rules:
Whenever Blue Sky disparages my vocabulary, or teach is scandalized by modern loose morals, just go ahead and post, taking a big virtual chug!

 

[want2bhapy]

I refer to an earlier posting when I first meet AaronAgassi we all have free will within the forum and we can choose not to participate in any discusions that we do not wish to. We should not seek conflict but if we do we should not recoil once a conflict has begun. I would suggest that we debate what we may not agree upon.

The hot topic of sex is not dead and is well worth debate and discussion. You should not dismiss the complex interaction that surround sex and love. Truly if people would take the time to understand the complexities we would have less teenage pregnacy and a lower divorce rate. Sex and love are undenably bound to have one without the other can leave the relationship incomplete. Very few people are capable of having a one night stand with out a feeling of self loathing and remorse, whether honestly admitted or not. A marriage with sex will most certainly in in conflict and can lead to divorce. I must disagree with your statement about chemical influence while I assume you meant drugs and alcohol an examination of the chemical procceses and their effects can be very enlightening. Just to prevent the personal attacks my marriage does not have this problem. If you have read my introduction or some of the postings on this thread my lonliness is not related to my family.

Sometimes I think people may not exercise control when they should. If you are interested in a discusion join it in a productive manner no matter which side you are on. When your only contribution is a "humorus" one liner you should keep it to lighter conversations. If we had been discussing abortion would you have made a fetus joke. Teach I am glad that you got some joy out of the comment as I assume that is your goal here, however the polite thing to do is keep it to yourself or PM if you really wanted to share your laugh at someone elses expense.

AaronAgassi, I believe we both know the answers to your last questions if this is the case I do not wish to spend anymore time on them. If indeed these question were posed as a genuine interest then I would be happy to share my thoughts.

I did not abandon the discussion and am largely unaffected by the interuptions here however the interuptions at home are paramount (my families needs come before my own). That is why I have not had the time required to put together a meaningful response. The biggest hassle is that it has put the original question on a different page.

Please continue......

 

[AaronAgassi]

Firstly, I take it that you typoed and meant: a marriage WITHOUT sex would be incomplete. Please advise.

As for my specification barring chemical influence, that was merely how I framed the challenge. Indeed, passing out massive quantities of booze and dope will often get more folks into the sack, but it still seems like cheating. Worse, as a non drinker/doper I feel quite left out! Moreover, the increasing need for chemical social lubricant only begs question of whatever the real obstacles to what everyone clearly wants so very urgently.

Am I serious about my propaganda/flaming questions? Yes, to the extent that I believe that a widespread custom of open discourse there upon might actually help defuse and disrupt peer pressure and flaming. But I go into this in greater depth at FoolQuest.com

Best of luck with all aggravations on the home front.

PS. There is also still the rest of this topic.

 

[want2bhapy]

Yes, I meant without thanks for catching that.

Flamers seek to gain attention and draw attention away from real issues. You see this all the time in the media and in special interest groups. An issue that would be largely trivial is blown way out of proportion for personal gain. A kind comment at an old mans party enraged the nation because it could be misconstrued and reinterpereted as something it was never meant to be.

This type of propaganda is largely based on certain inflamatory words like racist, sexist, etc. It is certainly not limited to this and can be presented in the bandwagon manner so common in the US congress today ie, If you don't vote for this you are gay or weak. Attacks of a personal nature outside of these general statements are also widely used.

Emotional not logical centers are the ones targeted by these type of tactics.

 

[want2bhapy]

As to the original topic it is my opinion that people who truly want to spend considerable time in vigorous discourse are often introverted or hide their desire to better fit in. If you were to go to a library and just approach a stranger and begin sharing your observation of the world. You would likely be met with a cold shoulder or complete avoidance. There is of course a chance you would meet someone with the same goals as you and you could gain a friend. Is this worth the risk? Has anyone actually ever started a friendship in this manner?

Why do people avoid eye contact and social contact? I am a very friendly person and I say hello to most of the people I interact with but it is rare that anything is returned. This breeds an environment that discourages positive social interactions. This could explain why so many people myself included have trouble establishing new relationships outside of institutions.

 

[AaronAgassi]

Then the cerebral and the sexual are handicapped much the same, socially.

 

[want2bhapy]

So the real question would be how to affect change on the society we are apart of. It is obviously flawed as it has left so many people alone and unfulfilled.

 

[AaronAgassi]

I would begin, if only possible, by seeking to engineer more proximate circumstances for social interaction. Hence the order of my questions: What is missing and desired, attainable how in principle, to be attained how in the concrete...

 

[want2bhapy]

My last post failed I lost my internet connection. Apparently bad connection are just running rampant these days.

In principle the simple platitudes that are spouted daily should be effective. Walk up to anyone and you should be able start a meaningful dialog. In practice however people are evasive and not always open to new relationships.

Sorry connection is still irratic I'll have to finish later.