Originally posted by Scribble
I'd say there's far more poverty, death and illness (real, serious threats) caused by selfish rich people than overly emotional people, though.
it's the selfish rich people manipulating the emotional people...through their emotions lol.
we voted for our problems man. why do we have so many homeless people yet send billions in aid to other countries?
you watch these sad feed the children commercials and send money overseas when there's a homeless child two blocks over. that's emotional manipulation.
we keep voting for the same people who do the same things over and over and over. and it's all for the feels.
Originally posted by RaisenWhilst there is a bit of that, it seems short-sighted to say that's all it is. I'd say wealth inheritance and archaic economic structures of days past are more responsible than social manipulation. Most of what the rich do is behind closed doors. Of course they manipulate people, but that's because those people are stupid, not just emotional. You can be resistant to manipulation whilst being emotional, as I said before.
it's the selfish rich people manipulating the emotional people...through their emotions lol.
we voted for our problems man. why do we have so many homeless people yet send billions in aid to other countries?you watch these sad feed the children commercials and send money overseas when there's a homeless child two blocks over. that's emotional manipulation.
we keep voting for the same people who do the same things over and over and over. and it's all for the feels.
Originally posted by Scribble
Whilst there is a bit of that, it seems short-sighted to say that's all it is. I'd say wealth inheritance and archaic economic structures of days past are more responsible than social manipulation. Most of what the rich do is behind closed doors. Of course they manipulate people, but that's because those people are stupid, not just emotional. You can be resistant to manipulation whilst being emotional, as I said before.
sure. stupidity and emotions. but the stupid are reached through their emotions dude. they are stupid...they don't do logic bro lol. so ruffle their feathers. create an enemy. create some intangible emotional bs story and get them to spend their money on stupid things.
Originally posted by ScribbleSo you're using rationality and self-discipline to control your emotions? I can respect that.
Not if I know my weaknesses. Self-awareness is key. To be overly emotional and unaware of the result of that is a bad sign for personal development, but if you know yourself well enough, you can make yourself more resistant to manipulation or coercion. You build armour. You don't let people see your weaknesses, either. I'm a fairly unstable person emotionally for whatever reason, but nobody knows it - I apply my mask every day and so people think I'm a generally well-rounded person. I take charge with natural ease, and never let people see the pressure getting to me, and I deliver results with expertise, and nobody will ever know that all the time, I was an overflowing mess of emotions, always on the edge of snapping. That's a big part of the balancing act. Self-awareness is far more important than almost anything else in life, imo.Also, being empathetic can help vastly in the world. So you don't want to be held responsible for hurting someone's feelings? Sure, go ahead and insult them or say whatever you want to say. But there's a lot to gain from mincing one's words. You can gain the support of enemies through empathy, you can make people like you enough to promote you by reading and understanding people. Psychopaths do it whilst faking it. I do the same thing, except I happen to be genuine. The end result is the same.
Critical thinking can be found in many parts of the biological world, in the ways that animals hunt and forage. If a gazelle is running in a semi-circle to shake of its pursuer, the lion takes a straight path instead of keeping on its tail and catches its prey. Apes use tools to open nuts too difficult to smash open with a rock. Etc. It's everywhere.
Thinking about how what you say to people affects them, either in your favor or against, is also an example of rationality.
A lion changing its course of direction to chase prey is the equivalent of an irrational/emotional human doing the same to their pet dog. It's a basic function.
Originally posted by |King Joker|
👆I do sense that that response is sarcastic, though. Perhaps brought on by some irritation that's manifesting itself into some passive aggressiveness? Maybe you need to do a deep breathing exercise?
no. I'm cool. just no point in going back and forth. the answers are pretty obvious and I know there's a lot of people that just want to live a lie. i'll live my happy life with the truth
Originally posted by |King Joker|Don't twist my words. What he said was exaggerated.
Link me to the study that says that women are incapable of removing emotions in decision making.What?
men tend to see issues and resolve them directly, due to the strong connections between the “perception” and “action” areas of their brains, while women might be more inclined to combine logic and intuition when solving a problem.
Their less-interconnected hemispheres might prompt men, for example, to be, “going along, executing things very skillfully and maybe not taking into account that someone didn't [do something] because they were having a bad day,” Verma explained. Meanwhile, “gut feelings, trying to join the dots together … women are known to be very strong in that.”
Researchers at Yale determined back in the nineties that men’s tendency is to primarily use the left side of their brain, while women generally shift back and forth, drawing on both the left and right sides. In practice, this means that men are more likely to have a fact- and logic-based leadership style, while women are more likely to see the big-picture, have stronger emotions, and rely on their intuition for decision-making.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rebecca-shambaugh/different-brains-differen_b_9480952.html
Originally posted by RaisenI'm no neuroscientist... but based on the words of people who are, I don't think what you're describing is actually possible.
women are the ones with emotions dude. as a man, one of our greatest assets is the ability to separate emotions from what needs to be done.you just wrote a huge paragraph full of feels. it's unnecessary
Your emotions are just another part of your decision-making process. You can't just extract what "needs to be done" using pure Vulcan logic. You can only deceive yourself that this is what you are doing.
Originally posted by Afro Cheese
I'm no neuroscientist... but based on the words of people who are, I don't think what you're describing is actually possible.Your emotions are just another part of your decision-making process. You can't just extract what "needs to be done" using pure Vulcan logic. You can only deceive yourself that this is what you are doing.
there's ways to subdue them. enough practice will result in little to nothing being able to affect you negatively. you just have to have a certain viewpoint on things
I dunno about that. That just sounds like having a strong resolve, which is not at all absent of its own emotional context. You have to have something to inspire you to be resilient in achieving a goal in the first place before you will find the will to do so.
So, your post was in response to this:
Originally posted by Scribble
I like some of the ideas that it entails, but from what I've seen a lot of [b]Libertarians are self-centred and selfish psychopaths who hold little to no regard for the people their 'ultimate freedom' ends up hurting. Good in concept, probably not very good in practice, but to be fair, that goes for almost every political ideology. [/B]
And you responded with "the feels" as if this is an irrelevant point because it has even the slightest touch of humanity in it. This seems like a cop-out to me. Or, if not a cop out, then you just haven't thought through the implications of a society run by selfish psychopaths. Because whenever you are proposing a system that is supposed to structure society, you need to take into account everyone it will effect. If your response is I don't care about the people for whom it wouldn't work well, then you're no longer pitching a utopian society but a sort of ponzi scheme that you feel you will benefit from.
Note: It's not my claim that Libertarianism is necessarily a society ran by selfish psychopaths. But that was essentially what was said in the post you quoted and as far as I could tell you saw nothing wrong with that.
Originally posted by Scribble
I'd say there's far more poverty, death and illness (real, serious threats) caused by selfish rich people than overly emotional people, though.
Man. You must have majored in Ultra Leftist Progressive Brainwashing while in College.
Probably went for all the extra time in the spin cycle just for fun.