The Rush To Be Right

Quahom1 said:
Quite right...now I have one for you...simplest of sayings but the hardest to follow...:eek:

"Practice what you preach"...a little harder than it sounds in life. ;)

Sometimes, it involves life...

v/r

Q
Click to expand...


LOL...

Now tring to do that would mean a whole lot of "logical fallacy" :D
 
YO-ELEVEN-11 said:
LOL...

Now tring to do that would mean a whole lot of "logical fallacy" :D
Click to expand...

where is the fallacy in doing what is correct? You tell others how to live...then you lead by example. Unless you are stating that the preacher can't walk the talk...then the issue is not with the message, but with the messenger.
 
Quahom1 said:
where is the fallacy in doing what is correct? You tell others how to live...then you lead by example. Unless you are stating that the preacher can't walk the talk...then the issue is not with the message, but with the messenger.
Click to expand...

Just a joke my Friend.:)
 
YO-ELEVEN-11 said:
Well, try this one on for size. :)

Golden Rules of Practical Trusims
1. Look before you leap
2. Stay the course
3. Do unto others before they do unto you.
4. Treat others Like you think they want to be treated
5. The only way to fish is with a fishing pole
6. Clean up your trash to keep the beggers away.

Both "Practical Trusims" and "Logical fallacies"
are in essence only as effective as the rules that govern them.
(There are rules that govern being "wrong" just as their are rules that govern being "right")

Stating that some thing is "Logic" is less "logical" than proving it is "logic". Having an opinion (even if it is "proven" wrong) anywhere on the spectrum is more "logical" than not having one at all.
(Being wrong can lead to learning) ( Discussing a "moot" point can lead to learning and knowing what a "moot" point is.):)

My point. (excuse the pun) :)

Interaction and growth has take place for "logical fallacy" to be transformed into Practical Trusim. ( In the begining the Heaven & Earth were "VOID" and out of that "VOID" came something.) (Something from nothing) imagine that.:)

So, We begin with golden rules of logical fallacy that seem to be more suited as practical truisms.

Thusly, to have logical fallacy is in fact logical and necessary to the growth and development of Practical Trusim. So, It may in fact be Logical that so many "Rush to be right" No matter how far apart on the spectrum that rush puts them or how "moot" some of the discussion may become. Thus spuring growth for mediation and then to understanding and ultimately PEACE.
:)
Now, with all that being said, and to throw another "Log"(Log-ic) :) on the fire.

Am I right or wrong?:D
Click to expand...


(sigh) Where do I begin?
Lets see, having no opinion is against the rules of logic? Therefore it is illogical to say "I abstain?"

I'm sorry Yo, you haven't made your case in any of this.
 
No Paladin. I am simply stating that "all" is logical but at different levels.
even illogic has roots in logic.

Paladin said:
having no opinion is against the rules of logic? .
Click to expand...

yo-eleven-11 said:
Stating that some thing is "Logic" is less "logical" than proving it is "logic". Having an opinion (even if it is "proven" wrong) anywhere on the spectrum is more "logical" than not having one at all. (Being wrong can lead to learning) ( Discussing a "moot" point can lead to learning and knowing what a "moot" point is.):) .
Click to expand...


So for example:

If I said "Paladin" you are wrong and I am right"

I have left out some of the middle ground in the process of determing if you are in fact "right or wrong"

In other words I used no process in this determination. Which in turn would make it a "Logical fallacy" or moot point.

In doing so, I have created a dialogue that will lead to wanting to establish a set of guidelines to establish what is right or wrong.

Paladin said:
(Therefore it is illogical to say "I abstain?".
Click to expand...

No, illogic is in fact logical in some circumstances. Abstaining is just another form of logic. Just as illogic is just another form of Logic.

example:

May childrens games have no "Logical" conclusion, but are Logical for them to do so that they learn to interact with other children.


So the Rush to be right, or the act of abstaning can be deemed logical or illogical in different ways.

Does this help any?:)
 
Yes that is most helpful! Would you say further then that there is a point of logical transcendance?
 
Kindest Regards, Flow!

LOL! :D
flowperson said:
Who ARE these people anyhow...? I for one do not look to them for commentary on political leadership in thought anymore than I look to the Rushman. Ralph Nader..well, that's another story because he has a record of credibility in the public arena. But he's Lebanese, and well...that's a second or now third world nation huh... so what would he know anyhow ?

By the way...did you know that the Rushter is from Cape Girardeau Missouri which has the tallest TV tower in the USA, and is also reputedly to be the first site of a UFO crash in 1941...even before Roswell, New Mexico? What a stroke of long-term political genius to find and cultivate the talents of a Jewish alien clone from the midwest near where the strongest earthquake in U.S. history originated to slash and ravage the dreaded liberal establishment !
Click to expand...
Oh my, I'm laughing so hard! Is this a deliberate attempt to crowd as many logical fallacies as possible into the shortest essay? I love it!

This thread is not a political argument Juan,
Click to expand...
It is pleasant to see that it is not, *here,* but it can easily become so (and has in the related thread specifically about political application of logical fallacies).

and you are absolutely right about the application of mass psychololgy techniques through the media. We pretty all much agree that this now established reality is likely intellectually poisonous for anyone exposed to it for extended periods of time. The real question is what we might be able to do about this so that people might be able to attempt to think clearly once more...probably an impossible dream. So I, for one, don't participate very much in media consumption, other than to find out what the weather might be tomorrow...but then the weather's pretty much the same here everyday. I do listen to NPR though, and shortwave newscasts from overseas.
Click to expand...
It's a good thing we don't take points off for spelling and grammar, huh? I am in basic agreement about limiting consumer consumption of mass media, but as with so many things, I think we can get a bit...defensive...about those avenues of media we prefer, and are therefore hesitant to surrender. Case in point, computers and online forums, just like CR. Now, to be fair, I do not see CR as a commercial site, and my hope and prayer is that it doesn't become one. Such prayers have been answered in the negative in the past elsewhere, so I hold no illusions to what the future may hold. Even so, considering the here and now, there are still advertising banners that do what they can to entice each of us. That enticement (in a truly professional, commercial advertisement) appeals to our emotions, not our intellect.

Since referring to the Nazis seems to be popular these days, remember that it was Josef Goebbels and Leni Reifenstahl that pioneered the use of mass media psychology in Germany in the 1930's to enable public acceptance of Hitler's rise to power. He and she found that if you repeatedly told or showed lies often enough and convincingly enough, a certain and increasing portion of the population would believe and implement policies to support the lies over time. It certainly worked in Germany, and it's certainly working on both sides of the political spectrum here. Hence, a profound and contentious schism in the body politic of the good ol' US of A.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the brief! I vaguely recall hearing Goebbel's name in relation to this (I think in association with the Nuremburg rallies), but I hadn't heard of Reifenstahl. Of course, all of this became a well-oiled and fine tuned machine by the time the US entered WWII, and Roosevelt, et al, were quick to capitalize on similar techniques. Englishman George Orwell exposed the propaganda machine for what it was in the 1945 release of the book "1984." So what you say is true, well known and documented.

Mine is not an argument that seeks to blame the messengers, but an argument that asks that the amplification of the messages be turned down somewhat so that messages of moderation might prevail over the long term. If I'm not mistaken, that was the original intent here. But in our commercially crazed world of communication, that's about as likely as the sun rising in the west tomorrow.
Click to expand...
I can empathize, and to a degree sympathize, with the sentiment expressed. Indeed, one cannot defend against an enemy one doesn't see. As the adage goes, "knowing is half of the battle."
 
Hi Juan...thanks for the reply.

Leni Reifenstahl, who died only a year or so ago, was the cinematographer who filmed the Nuremburg Rallies in such a majestic manner, and in so doing invented many modern techniques that professionals follow to this day. The images and sounds that she recorded and edited were truly represented as heroic and did a lot to enhance the "paperhanger's" image among the people so that it became a natural thing, over time, to look to him as a powerful leader of the people. The drumming, the fires, the flags, the precision marching all came together in a panorama of power and promise. Her most famous work was, Triumph Of The Will.

Goebbels sat at the center of the Third Reich's propaganda machine in the 30's and 40's and ran it with deadly precision and accuracy.

BTW, Reifenstahl did a lot of filming of underwater reefs in all parts of the world in her later years. Maybe that's why they're all beginning to die...huh?

flow....:cool:
 
flowperson said:
Paladin...

I think we're ok. Quite by accident I have noticed that the guards to the imagined realm mostly hang out in the top half of the board...you subversive you ! Keep up the good work.

flow....:cool:
Click to expand...

Actually "Ve're everyvhere"...just prefer the incogneto concept...:eek: :rolleyes: :p
 
Kindest Regards, Flow!

Leni Reifenstahl, who died only a year or so ago, was the cinematographer who filmed the Nuremburg Rallies in such a majestic manner, and in so doing invented many modern techniques that professionals follow to this day.
Click to expand...
At the risk of seeming sympathetic to the Nazi cause (of which I most voiciferously am *not*), there were a lot of developments by Germany of that period of time that were, for their day, monumental accomplishments. Our entire missile / rocket program stems from the work of Robert Goddard and took a quantum leap when certain Nazi scientists came to the west after the war. Russia got a few as well. The mapping of the various sections of the brain, is due to the work of The Angel of Death, Dr. Mengele. Nazi scientists for a time were working on a nuclear bomb. The jet engine is a Nazi German invention. The list goes on.

These are the kinds of things that made the Germans such formidable foes. Germans are brilliant people. It was only by sheer force of numbers and grit and determination, IMO, that the Allies were ultimately able to succeed.

My point is, that there are contributions from that war, from the failed side of that war, that are with us today influencing our social intercourse, influencing how we interact with each other and with the world around us. War is hell, but there are developments that come out of war that serve us down the road.

It seems to me the Germans were able to capitalize on the research by J. B. Watson, form it into a coherent tool (called propaganda), and use it to great success. So successful was this tool, it was adopted by the west and by Russia, and pretty much all militant first world nations since, and a host of "smaller" nations besides. Propaganda is an emotional appeal. One cannot rally one's peers to a call to war with logic and reason, one must appeal to their emotions, to their sense of patriotism and duty, pride and family.

My thoughts, anyway.
 
Kindest Regards, Flow!
flowperson said:
Yes Juan, the PR techniques have been used most successfully recently, up to a point.
Click to expand...
I am reminded of a quote from one of the PR guys from the '70's (forget now who, quoted him in my research paper for class), who said [paraphrased]: "yeah, everybody thinks advertising works great on other people, but not on them. Of course, I have to ask them, what do you think of the Hallmark commercials, or Campbell's soup?" Another quote from one of Watson's immediate successors, "we cannot create a want (desire) in anybody, it is not possible. All we can do is appeal to a desire that already exists."

So, trying not to make a big deal of mincing words, but "up to a point" is the norm, and has been since behavioral psych started reaching practical conclusions. Personally, considering how close the political divide has been in this country over the last couple of elections, I think the PR spin meisters have the art down to a science. Guaging by the venom spit across the center by both the right and the left, I cannot help but think it is only deliberately aggravated by those that know exactly what they are doing. Blame it on Rush if you want, but the truth is the liberal media is just as guilty.

Whether one chooses to see the reality behind this, and do something about it within one's own life, is another matter.

:D
 
YO-ELEVEN-11 said:
LOL.
some logic can be exclusive.:)
Click to expand...

Opinions are exclusive. Logic is universal. How it is applied may be for exclusive purposes, however, the process is still universal...:D

"If A=C and B=C, then A must equal B".
 
Quahom1 said:
Opinions are exclusive. Logic is universal. How it is applied may be for exclusive purposes, however, the process is still universal...:D
Click to expand...
And illogic is elusive logic by which we become universal by learning to get along. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top