Compassionate skepticism?

nineinchnails_999

Scholar
N
Joined
Mar 25, 2004
Messages
104
Okay, I'm gonna give this a shot.

I'm relatively new to this skepticism thing I will readily admit. I've been reading these forums like crazy the past few days and have been trying to post a lot so that people can get to know me better. I have also been overwhelmed by how welcoming this community is. I have no complaints about this board whatsoever.

What I am curious about is why it seems that these debates erupt into arguments and name-calling. It seems like a lot of arguments end with both sides shouting "You're wrong!" back and forth at each other. I'm not complaining, I'm just curious as why this seems to happen. Perhaps it is I who is wrong? (Wouldn't that be ironic.)

I'm not just blaming skeptics either, I see this on both sides of the debate. What it boils down to is, can there be a compassionate debate where both sides try not to tread on each other's toes while still having a somewhat civil argument? I would love to join into some of the debates that are going on as I find them all fascinating. I'm afraid however, because I don't take well to confronation. I can take an argument against my beliefs, but as wussy as it seems, as soon as someone calls me a name I have the tendency to walk the other way and never look back.

I have my own hypothesis for why these debates turn out in this fashion, perhaps someone can verify it for me. I think it might be due to the fact that most of you have been at this much longer than I have and therefore your patience may have just worn thin. You have all certainly seen more than I have, not just in this forum, but in the world in general. Maybe it is innocence, or perhaps naivete that has me thinking this way. It just seems silly to me that there should only be one forum with insults specifically ruled out. Shouldn't that be the case for all forums where debates are often held? In my opinion resorting to name-calling can only make your argument weaker, which further boggles me.

In any event, any explaination that anyone can give would be very helpful, whether you consider yourself a skeptic or not. I'm not trying to start a war here, I'm just looking for answers to help me better understand. And for cryin out loud let's not start the insults in this thread. I would hate to have to run away from a discussion that I started. :p
 
I think you have already mentioned most of the reasons. Consider: Posters here are people who have chosen to use a fair amount of their time for this purpose. To be an active poster here, you need to spend many hours a week on this board. That means that you have a collection of people here who just love a good argument.

What constitutes a good argument is a metter of individual taste; some like a good dung throwing match, some like a long, dry exchange of well researched evidence in long, elaborate, well-worded posts. ....And everything in between.

We all have our personal style, moods, pet peeves, etc, and it shows. However, pick your own style, act sensibly, and you will be respected, just as you respect others. If you don't like the style of an answer, simply say so; an "ad hominem ignored" note in a post goes a long way in cooling off things ;).

Hans
 
Welcome NIN!
I agree about the argument comments. I too am guilty of wussiness when it the debate degenerates into a stream of invective. I tend to just leave the thread and move on. I am also irritated when the debate descends into speculative metaphysical scenario's. I realise there is a place on this forum for debating the nature of consciousness but does every argument have to end up in a 'we're all just figments of Gods/mine/your imagination'. It may or may not be true but is completely beyond the limits of rationality, IMO.

I prefer to see this forum as a think tank and educational resource. I have learned a great deal since coming here (thanks to Shanek, Kittynh, Zep and a host of others). Some people here really know their subjects and I'd like to think I can contribute when my pet subjects come up.
 
I suspect it's nothing more complicated than people not wanting to be wrong. When they run out of ammo they throw insults instead.

You must keep in mind that there are many posters on these forums and there is a differing technique for each one. Some are more tolerant than others.

Frustrations can run high when the foundations of a belief are being questioned. It's also stressful when dealing with people that won't clarify their positions, who repeat themselves, and/or ignore valid arguments.

It is difficult to change others. The best way to go about it would be to set a good example with your own postings.
 
NIN, i think if you look, you will see that *some* folks do take the time to post thoughtfully and compassionately. Some others don't. Some of those that don't have made it onto my Ignore List, simply because i don't want to read "you're a cretin" over and over again.
Some people's posts i always read when i see them in a thread, because i know they will say something worthwhile (or entertaining).
My advice is: wait and watch. You will see who is worth listening to in time :)
 
nineinchnails_999 said:

I have my own hypothesis for why these debates turn out in this fashion, perhaps someone can verify it for me. I think it might be due to the fact that most of you have been at this much longer than I have and therefore your patience may have just worn thin. You have all certainly seen more than I have, not just in this forum, but in the world in general. Maybe it is innocence, or perhaps naivete that has me thinking this way. It just seems silly to me that there should only be one forum with insults specifically ruled out. Shouldn't that be the case for all forums where debates are often held? In my opinion resorting to name-calling can only make your argument weaker, which further boggles me.
Click to expand...

I think we all HAVE had our patience worn thin. I myself have been treated rather badly by believers in other forums, and have resulted to being nasty on purpose. I hate to be that way, and I try hard not be.

However, at one point you just feel like you're banging your head against a brick wall. Believers often avoid the question, ignore you, tell you that you're a troll, a debunker (which is an evil thing to them) that you have a hidden agenda, that you have psychological problems, etc. etc.

Also, there are skeptics who will refuse to budge in their statements and insult the believers' intelligence, tell them that they are crazy, delusional, etc., and that gives skeptics a bad name. It also fuels the fire of the believer.

I don't know about anyone else, but I don't just sit back and take that kind of stuff.

This has occured on every skeptic/paranormal forum I've been to. There are just some people on both sides who refuse to have an open mind while accusing everyone else of having a closed mind.
 
You seem like a reasonable person, so welcome.

When I came here I read a lot of old threads -- the long ones, from beginning to end -- no skipping posts. That way, I got a feel for the tone of most of the regulars.

Try the infamous 'ladybrook' one. Or just about any thread where people are debating with Interesting Ian or Lucianarchy. See how you feel about who is being fair, intellectually honest, polite, and reasonable. See who you think is being unreasonable, dishonest, evasive, and abusive. Look at exactly where the abuse starts, and who starts it.

If abuse upsets you, do not even dignify it with a reply. We expect people to answer hard questions about their beliefs, but you are not expected to answer abusive posters if you don't want to.

There are really two very distinct main camps here, although I'm sure some will even disagree with that. What might be humorous to one camp tends not to amuse the other.

The first person to tell you that you are 'too stupid' to understand what they are saying has lost the argument. If they call you a 'moron', that would most likely be Interesting Ian, and you can put him on ignore, or just delight in seeing him being humiliated in his constantly frustrated attempts to explain errant nonsense.

Don't post anything like the above paragraph if you don't like abuse. ;)

Read the forum rules.

Try not to 'be stupid';)
 
I had similar questions when I started on this forum.

This is my second post:
Hi Everyone,
After TAM I visited the forum for the first time. Since then I have been reading it on a fairly regular basis. Some of my thoughts:
I don't understand some of the animosity displayed in some of the posts. Why would someone get so angry about a different point of view? Frustrated? Yes. Amazed at the depth of ignorance? Yes. But to become so incensed that you resort to not so cryptic swearing and defamation seems unbecoming. Not that I'm opposed to swearing, but in a thoughtful forum, it detracts from the argument.
On the other hand, some of you seem very nice and really have established social relationships with each other. That concern for each other is refreshing and I was suprised at the amount of social interaction in a forum.
Some of the postings go on and on with so much minutiae that I quickly lose interest. And some of the postings seem like you're trying to talk sense to a drunk. (i.e. Swett) Why not just ignore those postings and save your breath (or cyber ink)?
Only my opinions. Larry

Take bug-girl's good advice.
Welcome

Edit: You will learn who you like to read and who you don't care to read. For me I don't read posters like WWu777 or Pillory. I found that they are a waste of my time.
 
Wow so many good replies! I'll try to get to as many as I can but I have a class soon so I'll have to be quick.

MRC Hans- You bring up a good point about how individuality changes the way that different people look at an argument. Your advice about ignoring extraneous or insulting posts was good too, and is some advice that I'll try to take.

Oleron- I agree with the last statement you made, wholeheartedly. I have learned so much from this place after being here for just a short time. Its also good to know that I'm not the only wussy one on this board :p

Apoger- I agree that what you listed may be reasons why people start flinging insults, but does that make them good ones? I would think that an easier way out if you don't have anything left to say would be "If you can't say something useful don't say anything at all." I'm not saying that you do these things, that was just my reaction to what you said.

Also, I'm not trying to change anything. I'm trying to get an idea of how this board works so that hopefully I can become a better debater. If someone had argued that insults were a vital part of an argument I would've listened to them too (although thankfully no one did that).

Bug Girl- I already have seen some people who are always worth reading. They're the reason why I like this board pretty much. They seem like they're outnumbered by people who use insults as a way to get their point across, however.

sweetkb713- You were agreeing with what I said in my original post I take it. I have seen the "banging your head on a wall" scenario on this board more than once already which is led me to the conclusion that some people on this board don't have patience. You're also right, there are some people giving skeptics a bad name out there, but that will happen with any group of people, I believe, no matter how good the intentions of a group are.

malcolmdl- thanks for your advice about reading past threads. I'll take it-- when I have the time to.

I'm sorry that I didn't have more time to respond to your replies more throughly but like I said, I have a class. And I'm already running late. Thanks so much for your input!

Doug
 
nineinchnails_999 said:
Wow so many good replies! I'll try to get to as many as I can but I have a class soon so I'll have to be quick.

MRC Hans- You bring up a good point about how individuality changes the way that different people look at an argument. Your advice about ignoring extraneous or insulting posts was good too, and is some advice that I'll try to take.

Oleron- I agree with the last statement you made, wholeheartedly. I have learned so much from this place after being here for just a short time. Its also good to know that I'm not the only wussy one on this board :p

Apoger- I agree that what you listed may be reasons why people start flinging insults, but does that make them good ones? I would think that an easier way out if you don't have anything left to say would be "If you can't say something useful don't say anything at all." I'm not saying that you do these things, that was just my reaction to what you said.

Also, I'm not trying to change anything. I'm trying to get an idea of how this board works so that hopefully I can become a better debater. If someone had argued that insults were a vital part of an argument I would've listened to them too (although thankfully no one did that).

Bug Girl- I already have seen some people who are always worth reading. They're the reason why I like this board pretty much. They seem like they're outnumbered by people who use insults as a way to get their point across, however.

sweetkb713- You were agreeing with what I said in my original post I take it. I have seen the "banging your head on a wall" scenario on this board more than once already which is led me to the conclusion that some people on this board don't have patience. You're also right, there are some people giving skeptics a bad name out there, but that will happen with any group of people, I believe, no matter how good the intentions of a group are.

malcolmdl- thanks for your advice about reading past threads. I'll take it-- when I have the time to.

I'm sorry that I didn't have more time to respond to your replies more throughly but like I said, I have a class. And I'm already running late. Thanks so much for your input!

Doug
Click to expand...

That was a very thoughtful response, Doug.

Now, tell us where you stand on psi, and see what others think.:D :D :D
 
Posted by nineinchnails

If someone had argued that insults were a vital part of an argument I would've listened to them too (although thankfully no one did that).
Click to expand...
Well, my turn! :) Because, yes, I definitely think insults, put downs, ad hominem are a big part of the "debate" skills of some people here. Most definitely.
 
Clancie said:

Well, my turn! :) Because, yes, I definitely think insults, put downs, ad hominem are a big part of the "debate" skills of some people here. Most definitely.
Click to expand...

I agree that they are a big part but are they a neccessary part? Can debates be held without them? That's what I really meant when I said that.
 
Clancie said:

Well, my turn! :) Because, yes, I definitely think insults, put downs, ad hominem are a big part of the "debate" skills of some people here. Most definitely.
Click to expand...

You mean like here:http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=37844


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by malcolmdl

I guess you might even be a head, or assistant head, in a primary school. No?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Clancie says:
Wrong again, malcolm.

How about you? My intuition tells -me- that you're still in school.
-----------------------
You see. I pay her a compliment and get an insult in return.

Getting the idea, nineinch?
 
Yea yea. I'm getting the idea. But keep your insults in the threads where they came from. This is a no-insult zone, because I'm a baby. :p
 
Posted by malcolmdl

I guess you might even be a head, or assistant head, in a primary school. No?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Clancie says:
Wrong again, malcolm.

How about you? My intuition tells -me- that you're still in school.
-----------------------
You see. I pay her a compliment and get an insult in return.

Getting the idea, nineinch?
Click to expand...
I didn't take that as a compliment, malcolm. (Nor your previous remark that I must be a "school marm").

I don't think it's an insult to be a student, either, or to sound like one. (nor did I mention any level). Some of the best posters here are in high school, so it's really a rather neutral remark.

But, out of respect for nineinchnails, I'm going to stop responding to your personal put downs, malcolm (they are frequent).

nineinchnails,
I agree. I don't think insults are necessary. The problem is, once someone starts up with them, its really difficult to ignore nasty cracks. Then, as you point out, people lose track of -who- started it...no one cares...and ultimately both participants wind up looking childish and petty.

I don't know why it happens so much--except that it seems to be considered an acceptable debate tactic as long as it's used by a so-called "skeptic" toward a so-called "believer" (not universally acceptable here, by any means, but..still...widely accepted).
 
nineinchnails_999 said:
I agree that they are a big part but are they a neccessary part? Can debates be held without them?
Click to expand...
The general rule of thumb is "never argue with an idiot, they'll only bring you down to their level, then beat you with experience".

There are quite a few people who I regularly read who within 3 or 4 posts retort with a "I cant believe how stupid you are!". The first thoughts that usually go through my head might sound like "Oh, they are so cute! Like children!".

Only about 3 options exist:
1. Develope a sharp tongue.
2. Build an impervious steel wall guarding you from insults.
3. Kindly ignore.

For the most part, the good lot of people on this forum are the most civil. Try to ignore the 1% of uncivil people who muscle in 90% of the posts you read...
 
Clancie- I see your point. If someone starts in with the cracks then I can see how a good reation would be to start making them right back. I don't think its appropriate, but that's me, I'm not going to start giving lectures as to why people shouldn't. Thanks for restraining from respoing out against malcom though I appreciate it.

Yaweh- I liked your post a lot. It seems to me that out of your choices that I see #1 a lot, #2 some, and #3 hardly at all. I could just be looking in the wrong places, though. Personally, this thread has made me want to adapt #3. I can't be sheltered from people calling me nasty names the rest of my life, nor can I continue to run away when they do. Thanks everyone. You've brought a lot of insight into this thread, I think.
 
It's easy to take a question the wrong way on the Internet.

A question asked to clarify a position is easily taken as a question challenging the position, which makes the questioned person adopt a defensive, and probably hostile, attitude back at the questioner. This misinterpretation feeds on itself until you have an all-out flamefest.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom