Looking for criticism of some ideas

[Vera]

It looks to me like the only people who are confused and frustrated in discussions with me, are the ones who persist in thinking that I have some kind of hidden agenda or hidden motives, without giving any consideration at all to what I say about my reasons, as a possible explanation for what I'm doing. Then they blame me for the confusion and frustration that creates for them.

ETA:
Well, obviously, that’s all they can do, as long as they persist in thinking that. All that I can object to is … is … um … hm. Never mind.

People are NOT confused. Unlike you seem to be by, well, pretty much everything in life and the human condition. People are getting damned tired of the buckets of vomit that you have unleashed onto this place in the span of mere days. Without saying a single useful thing.

If it were another forum you would've been banned already. Data storage is horrible for the environment and you are literally making the plight of the planet worse but the sheer number of empty data you're CHOKING our servers - and the planet - with.

Yet another way in which you're ACTIVELY making the world a worse place.

[Cavebear]

This is a RATIONAL PLACE.

ROTFL!

Honestly, seriously, is that really what you think?

Yes. I think (cogito ergo sum). But importantly, I try to provide details and reasons for my thoughts. They can certainly be disagreed with ( and feel free to do so) but I don't just suggest and repeat. I have tried to get you to engage in actual discussion (and failed) and I have offerred suggestions to you to actually expand on your repeated statement "Does anyone know of any other possible reason for people not considering what I say I'm doing, as a possible explanation for what I'm doing?"

Which is completely and utterly funny... Let's put is this way... "When the Earth rotates toward the sunlight, it shines in my East window in the morning. Which window does it shine in in the morning where YOU live? Can you even make a declarative statement about that?

[Inkubus]

After reviewing this and other replies (mine included), I have to smile.  Jimhabegger is evasive, repetitive, and very non-responsive to actual questions.  So he/her/it could just be playing games, be interested in causing confusion, or be a bot or some kind.  The posting pattern suggests a bot, but I won't preclude the possibility that it is someone who merely thinks in several simple phrases and uses them often similar to a bot.

Reviewing the above posts from regulars here and Jimhabegger's replies, what I notice most is no actual discuss from Jimhabegger.  This could become very interesting...

One thing I can assure you all; I won't be taking "his" posts very seriously from here on out.

I can't make it out either. The outrageous prose suggests a bot but then as you spotted yourself this shit has been going on for years so I would expect after all this time the programmers would have modified the thing. But then as you hinted he may be a troll imitating a bot.
Now wouldn't that be something.

[jimhabegger]

This is a RATIONAL PLACE.

Does your idea of rational include avoiding blatant, notorious logical fallacies, in debating? Or at the very least, using arguments that are not logical fallacies, sometimes?

"Asking for a friend."

[SYZ]

Does your idea of rational include avoiding blatant, notorious logical fallacies, in debating? Or at the very least, using arguments that are not logical fallacies, sometimes?

[Inkubus]

Does your idea of rational include avoiding blatant, notorious logical fallacies, in debating? Or at the very least, using arguments that are not logical fallacies, sometimes?

Well fuck me how did I miss that?

[Cavebear]

This is a RATIONAL PLACE.

Does your idea of rational include avoiding blatant, notorious logical fallacies, in debating? Or at the very least, using arguments that are not logical fallacies, sometimes?

"Asking for a friend."

Yes, quite obviously. Do you even comprehend what you posted?

[Cavebear]

This is a RATIONAL PLACE.

Does your idea of rational include avoiding blatant, notorious logical fallacies, in debating? Or at the very least, using arguments that are not logical fallacies, sometimes?

"Asking for a friend."

I think my fellow atheists replied pretty well.

You have friends? Can you name one? Do bots dream of electric sheep?

[Peebothuhlu]

One of my reasons that I told myself for wanting to read and post here again was because when I was here before, I learned some new ways of thinking that I really liked, and I thought maybe it could happen again. For example, I learned that I don't care whether or not there is any real or existing being corresponding to the word "God" in Christian and Baha'i scriptures. I do have an opinion and a feeling about it, which contradict each other, but I don't think that I need to know, for any of my purposes, and I've lost interest in trying to figure out what it could possibly mean to say that there is, or that there isn't. I also learned to think of what those scriptures say about God as a collection of analogies, and of the word "God" being used in different ways in different analogies.

The criticism I'm looking for now is not about that. It's okay with me if people want to criticize it, but that isn't what I'm looking for now. I'm looking for criticism of my ideas for what to do about injustices and oppression, and how to live the best lives we can, in the world as it is now.

Firstly?

Yes, you are wrong.

Thank you. I am accepting payments in kitten hugs. Please hug some kittens.

Secondly?

On a personal level for helping with the ills you percieve? Be nice untill it's time to not be nice.

On larger levels? Be a responsible voter.

Again, you're most welcome. Please hug some kittens.

 

Not at work.

[mordant]

FWIW in my experience and observation, most people most of the time do not want to have a really accurate and nuanced view of injustice and oppression, its actual root causes and likely cures, because it all seems too complex and daunting and costly and generally requires them to change their own thinking and assumptions and maybe even take some small share of personal responsibility for these ills. They would rather insist that for example, police violence can be fixed with better training, more money, better equipment -- they don't want to contemplate that existing systems like that have deep inherent flaws, especially when those systems are familiar and have long existed mostly unquestioned at least by those in control of society. We are taught a narrative as youngsters that 'Murica is just, good, noble, and decent, and most importantly right -- indeed, even exceptional. Anything that requires society to self-reflect or change runs against this simplistic narrative.

Hilariously (or sadly, depending on how you look at it), people outside our bubble can see very clearly what we cannot about ourselves, but their views don't count, either. They can't possibly understand our wonderfulness.

Most of us, if we were really being honest, value personal comfort and the status quo over justice or freedom or change. Politicians and corporations know this, and play us like fiddles using this knowledge. Most particularly, we are generally socialized to avoid conflict or controversy and are quick to discount anything that doesn't produce instant results. And now, ironically, in many aspects of public life we've run out of time to address systemic problems and have little choice but to experience the consequences of neglecting them for so long, because incrementalism can't even credibly pretend to be cutting it as a strategy anymore.

I am not sitting in judgment (much) of my fellow man because I'm no different. I went through a period over the past decade of agitating for change, and I have thrown in the towel because I'm old and tired and disgusted with humanity and at this point just trying to save up enough $ to survive my dotage in -- yes, there's that word again -- relative comfort, or at least not too much pain. Whatever torch I had to pass, I've passed to the next generation, and good luck with that.