19 Mar 15
Originally posted by EladarThat is such a stupid assertion it hardly merits debate. I can think of no social situation in which empathy is not relevant. It is hardly safe to drive a car without thinking about what other drivers might be likely to do. Lack of empathy is the mark of a sociopath.
Empathy for special groups.
That kind of empathy is immoral and should be seen as such.
Freedom is for all.
When you write "that kind of empathy" you are also making assumptions that are not justified.
19 Mar 15
Originally posted by finneganYeah I know. The point I'm making is easily ignored by calling it stupid and pretending the it doesn't exist.
That is such a stupid assertion it hardly merits debate. I can think of no social situation in which empathy is not relevant. It is hardly safe to drive a car without thinking about what other drivers might be likely to do. Lack of empathy is the mark of a sociopath.
When you write "that kind of empathy" you are also making assumptions that are not justified.
20 Mar 15
Originally posted by finneganEmpathy is in short supply in this forum. Your verbal attacks on anyone with a differing perspective from your own is demonstrably a lack of empathy. What empathy isn't, is a sort of soft bigotry, looking upon others as incapable of self determination, and totally reliant on society or government, or of those with superior knowledge like you.
That is such a stupid assertion it hardly merits debate. I can think of no social situation in which empathy is not relevant. It is hardly safe to drive a car without thinking about what other drivers might be likely to do. Lack of empathy is the mark of a sociopath.
When you write "that kind of empathy" you are also making assumptions that are not justified.
20 Mar 15
Originally posted by EladarHe might be reminded that the argument technique of calling something stupid as a refutation is most often employed in kindergarten. Older people usually resort to rationalism, or evidence.
Yeah I know. The point I'm making is easily ignored by calling it stupid and pretending the it doesn't exist.
Originally posted by bill718More lies. Howard Shultz is a flaming democrat by his own admission.
Whodey...you have an above average chess rating. It's too bad this does not translate into an above average accuracy of the things you read, and report on here. Howard Schultz was encouraging his employees to discuss the subject of race as a way of getting people to open up about their feelings and views on the subject, nothing more. While I have some misgiv ...[text shortened]... things on RHP just to bother people, because if you really do believe them, I'm worried for you.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2012/11/01/obama-schultz-starbucks-endorsement/1675237/
Howard Shultz has no business prying into the "feelings" of his employees or his customers. Mr. Shultz by his own admission is a partisan shill. He is one of a long list of people involved in the thought policing of America.
- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12477
20 Mar 15
Originally posted by FishHead111We can only hope. If you must drink that awful muck called coffee, man up and support your local coffee house. No, local, not locally-located but paying no taxes and sending all profits to Seattle.
I predict there will be many Starbucks employees saying the wrong thing to the wrong person and getting them all riled up and receiving a butt-kicking.
20 Mar 15
Originally posted by normbenignMy technique of referring to your stupidity as well as that of Eladar is not intended to refute any argument or persuade any contributor. It is simply an expression of my frustration in the face of your intransigence. If I say that you are too stupid to merit a continuing debate, then that is obviously just a rude way of being unpleasant.
He might be reminded that the argument technique of calling something stupid as a refutation is most often employed in kindergarten. Older people usually resort to rationalism, or evidence.
When I encounter, for example, people willing to draw all sorts of idiotic inferences from whatever you imagine the term "empathy" might possibly mean and seeking to contort this into a weird type of ideological debating point, then I spit my metaphorical dummy out of the metaphorical pram and declare that you are too tiresome to tolerate.
Whether you are persuaded or refuted is, in this situation, not uppermost in my mind.
20 Mar 15
Originally posted by finneganYou can't refute opinion.
My technique of referring to your stupidity as well as that of Eladar is not intended to refute any argument or persuade any contributor. It is simply an expression of my frustration in the face of your intransigence. If I say that you are too stupid to merit a continuing debate, then that is obviously just a rude way of being unpleasant.
When I encoun ...[text shortened]... erate.
Whether you are persuaded or refuted is, in this situation, not uppermost in my mind.
But wait I was using a valid source, but your source is just idiotic propaganda! Blah, blah, blah.
To have a debate you must first agree to basic facts. Since you are in la la land, what you believe are facts are simply lies. But that's OK what I believe are facts you believe are lies.
So where's the debate? Only in your own mind. Perhaps you aren't bright enough to see the reality of internet 'debates'.
20 Mar 15
Originally posted by finneganAs I already stated, your opinions are grounded in self absorption, and a notion that any other idea is "stupid". Debating is not what you want to do.
My technique of referring to your stupidity as well as that of Eladar is not intended to refute any argument or persuade any contributor. It is simply an expression of my frustration in the face of your intransigence. If I say that you are too stupid to merit a continuing debate, then that is obviously just a rude way of being unpleasant.
When I encoun ...[text shortened]... erate.
Whether you are persuaded or refuted is, in this situation, not uppermost in my mind.
20 Mar 15
Originally posted by normbenignOn the contrary, whenever you are confronted with detailed rebuttals you run out of arguments and become tiresome.
As I already stated, your opinions are grounded in self absorption, and a notion that any other idea is "stupid". Debating is not what you want to do.