RE: The Happening Continues to Happen and Now it Has a Name!
Thanks for your feedback @mlgcrypto!
"I highly disagree with the notion that we are only the arbiters of our own subjective truths. This is not only wrong but is extremely corrosive to rational discussion."
Sure if were discussing metaphysics than all truth becomes subjective, but when discussing objective reality there must be some form of assumed truth.
I think that the subjective opinions of one or more individuals will many times agree that a particular idea is objectively true. If we didn't step into that land of make-believe, we probably would not be able to accomplish anything. Scientist do this all the time with their theories and counter theories. They put something out there, and it seems true, and theoretically, it is accepted as true, unless and until someone can provide a better theory.
Take time for example. It exists in our minds when we play let's pretend, but it didn't exist there until we created it, and when we created it, nothing new sprang forth into existence. Sure, you have clocks and they can tell you what time it is, but they don't tell us what time is. We certainly didn't create it. Whatever it is, it existed here long before we did. So we play lets pretend and allow the speed at which planets orbit each other to dictate our earthly lives. Now our days have been divided into 86,400 seconds.
Is there really that many seconds in the day, or is the phrase meaningless. I think it all depends on who you ask. In some areas in the world being just seconds late off of a work break will result in a dock in pay. So for someone like that the 86k seconds is more meaningful. Yet to a child, that's just a few years old. Their minds have not been conquered by time yet. The damage has yet to be done.
While I do agree that everybody has the right to their own world view, I do not agree that its healthy to allow people to hold world views that are completely fucking wrong.
What would you suggest be done with the heretics?
Perfect example would be the widely held belief that communism is achievable without creating a ruling class. As much as id love an idealistic communist society to be truly achievable, objectively it has been proven time and time again that it is impossible.
Maybe you are right, but just to play devils advocate for a moment, what about voluntary communes? I believe in the '70s their were many groups of hippies that tried that kind of thing out for a while, and at the times that it didn't go all helter skelter, the worst that happened was that in addition to sharing everything, they also shared each others STDs. Do you think voluntary communes can exist without imposing a ruling class?
Personally I'm known for arguing and calling people out, as are most of my friends. Many times I find out that I'm wrong, or that I do not understand the topic as much as I thought I did, but having that discussion helps both parties come to the truth. Situations do exist where it is best to just nod and pretend that you don't know anything but as a culture we tend to do nod and smile too much. We subconsciously care more about offending other people more the reaching the truth. This becomes extremely problematic when in an academic setting, this refusal to challenge false ideas is what has people believing in all sorts of failed ideologies such as the my earlier example
You're forgetting that the hippies were all on LSD, which made the people with the good LSD the ruling class
LOL
One way of looking at this discussion is in two parts:
In order to blast out a fact (which may or may not be correct, depending on whether or not you are correct), you only need to consider the first. If you actually want to persuade most people, you must consider the second part. Psychology plays into this, so things like approach, subject beliefs, phrasing, tone of voice, body language, and conversational reciprocity will play a part in this.
Some people, of course, "data exchangers", don't need the hand holding, and for these people, you can just blast out reality as you see it, expect the same, vigorously argue it, and then make conclusions (all absent emotion, largely, as data exchange does not require emotion.) A group of these people is a powerful intellectual force indeed.
Well said!