Please read this! SLC Dunk- Black Lives Matter

AlaskanAssassin

Well-Known Member
So, responding to suffering with empathy is too hard for you?
Responding with empathy is the easy part, and I've always offered it when appropriate or needed. Responding with truth, facts, and knowledge, especially in circumstances when someone is struggling, that is truly challenging. It may not be what they want to hear, but by doing so you are potentially providing someone with the tools necessary to better their life, and the life of their loved ones. Empathy mostly only makes people feel better in the short term.
 

One Brow

Well-Known Member
Responding with empathy is the easy part, and I've always offered it when appropriate or needed. Responding with truth, facts, and knowledge, especially in circumstances when someone is struggling, that is truly challenging. It may not be what they want to hear, but by doing so you are potentially providing someone with the tools necessary to better their life, and the life of their loved ones. Empathy mostly only makes people feel better in the short term.
So, you think you're qualified to tell other people what the problems in their life are, and how to better it? You think you have such a command of the truth, facts, and knowledge that you can apply it universally?
 

One Brow

Well-Known Member
Bret has some excellent insight and thoughts on BLM, and the general state of our country. He makes a lot of connections to what is currently brewing in the USA to the beginnings of the Cultural Revolution in China.
You contradicted yourself in two consecutive sentences.
 

AlaskanAssassin

Well-Known Member
So, you think you're qualified to tell other people what the problems in their life are, and how to better it? You think you have such a command of the truth, facts, and knowledge that you can apply it universally?
When did I suggest or imply either of these things? As with anyone, there are times when I am qualified, and other times when I'm not. However, if someone is qualified, they should feel morally compelled to help others with that information. This action is 100X more powerful than someone simply offering empathy, which typically only has short term benefits.

I'm not sure why you are trying to infer maliciousness from my comment.
 

Beer

Well-Known Member
So, you think you're qualified to tell other people what the problems in their life are, and how to better it? You think you have such a command of the truth, facts, and knowledge that you can apply it universally?
Just because someone tells you something or feels a certain way doesn't mean you have to take it as fact. A lot, if not all, of these situations are ruled by emotion and that is a dangerous ruler.
 

One Brow

Well-Known Member
Just because someone tells you something or feels a certain way doesn't mean you have to take it as fact. A lot, if not all, of these situations are ruled by emotion and that is a dangerous ruler.
A reliance on pure statistics removes the importance of experience, which is also a dangerous place.
 
Last edited:

One Brow

Well-Known Member
How is describing what someone else said in a podcast contradicting myself? Lol.
By using "excellent", you went beyond description to endorsing the validity of that comparison, when it's really an awful comparison used solely for the emotional impact rather than revealing anything meaningful.

If you don't believe me, we can play a game. You list comparisons "to what is currently brewing in the USA to the beginnings of the Cultural Revolution in China", and for each one, I'll list both a contrast with the Cultural Revolution and a comparison to the US period of 1881-1890. Who do you think will run out of items to list first?

When did I suggest or imply either of these things? As with anyone, there are times when I am qualified, and other times when I'm not. However, if someone is qualified, they should feel morally compelled to help others with that information. This action is 100X more powerful than someone simply offering empathy, which typically only has short term benefits.

I'm not sure why you are trying to infer maliciousness from my comment.
Not maliciousness, just arrogance. Telling someone how to better themself is the ultimate in ego gratification, and very seldom of real use to the person you are sharing the information with; information that is usually trite and repetitive.
 

AlaskanAssassin

Well-Known Member
By using "excellent", you went beyond description to endorsing the validity of that comparison, when it's really an awful comparison used solely for the emotional impact rather than revealing anything meaningful.
Yeah, there was no contradiction in what I wrote. Sounds like you haven't listened to the podcast. Bret is a super progressive guy, and you are exemplifying exactly how the left tears itself apart.

Not maliciousness, just arrogance. Telling someone how to better themself is the ultimate in ego gratification, and very seldom of real use to the person you are sharing the information with; information that is usually trite and repetitive.
Wow, this is the most cynical thing I've read in years. I literally can't believe this is your worldview. Sounds to me like you haven't had very good mentors in your life. Lots of bad mentors and role models out there, but good ones impart knowledge and advice out of pure selflessness, with only love and kindness for the person or people they are trying to help.
 

Beer

Well-Known Member
A reliance on pure statistics removes the importance of experience, which is also a dangerous place.
Agreed. But I do trust data far more than experience. For example, eyewitnesses to crime are extremely unreliable. Same with people interpreting others thoughts while relaying their experiences.
 

One Brow

Well-Known Member
Agreed. But I do trust data far more than experience. For example, eyewitnesses to crime are extremely unreliable. Same with people interpreting others thoughts while relaying their experiences.
Data is not some objective source of information. Data is collected, ultimately if not proximately, by people. What you are saying is you trust one type of experience over another.
 

One Brow

Well-Known Member
Yeah, there was no contradiction in what I wrote. Sounds like you haven't listened to the podcast. Bret is a super progressive guy, and you are exemplifying exactly how the left tears itself apart.
Conservatives often confuse libertarian positions with progressive positions. Quite frankly, every thing you describe of what he said (such as the evolutionary psychology nonsense) reeks of misunderstanding this difference.

Wow, this is the most cynical thing I've read in years. I literally can't believe this is your worldview. Sounds to me like you haven't had very good mentors in your life. Lots of bad mentors and role models out there, but good ones impart knowledge and advice out of pure selflessness, with only love and kindness for the person or people they are trying to help.
Advice is like horseradish. When it is appropriate, it can be the perfect enhancer. However, it's usefulness is limited, and you never give horseradish to someone who just wants mayonnaise or ketchup. Even when you do offer it, sometimes less is better.

When people really want advice, they'll ask for it. When they want empathy, giving advice is meeting your ego, not their needs.
 

Beer

Well-Known Member
Data is not some objective source of information. Data is collected, ultimately if not proximately, by people. What you are saying is you trust one type of experience over another.
Depends on the type of data, who is collecting it, and if they are trying to prove a point before collecting the data. Data in polling or surveys can obviously be very experiential and inaccurate. But data in my job for example is extremely accurate, has no emotion or bias, and just provides the facts of what is happening in a technical space.

The chances the data is telling a story more close to the truth is far more likely than someone telling their experience as it requires them to assign intent, thoughts, biases, etc .... to people they don't know.
 

AlaskanAssassin

Well-Known Member
So that’s your takeaway from the analogy?
I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt and call it willful ignorance since I don’t think you are that obtuse.
I think you need to rethink the analogies you are using and how they might be interpreted by disadvantaged groups.

My grand-father was a full-blooded Cherokee Indian, raised on a reservation in Oklahoma. I'm an enrolled Tribal member, and while my immediate family no longer live on the reservation, I work professionally consulting for Tribal governments. Society, and in particular the Federal Government, have been known for treating Native Americans "like children". Funding is highly restricted, lands are held in trust, communities are told where they can live, use of traditional languages were outlawed, the types of businesses they can operate are regulated, etc. This type of treatment is analogous with how we treat children. I've been in countless Tribal Council meetings with individuals expressing how sick and tired they are of being "treated like children" (mostly by the government).

This may not have been your intent, but it's curious to me that you chose this analogy. While I can't speak for any "group", I think most could care less about a shoulder to cry on, and rather want concrete ideas/solutions/action to eliminating their inherent disadvantages and removing their roadblocks to prosperity. This is why disadvantaged groups ask certain others to stay silent. They don't want apologies or vain attempts at empathy. They want a better life.

My Libertarian-ish viewpoints mostly come from my grandfather, who told me stories of the "Trail of Tears", subsequent treaties broken, and countless failed attempts by the Federal Government to correct these injustices, all of which have done more harm than good.

 
Top