DaVinci

@ErwinIf you aren't an anarchist then what are you? The self defense argument, huh? You do understand that the left viewed voting for Hillary as self defense, right? How do you keep out foreigners forever if you can't even defeat the left? They'll be back next election. What's her face losing France is a sign that the globalists are pushing back hard.

But you guys are describing this site as being alt-right, and have giant "alt-right" banners. You aren't really talking about anarchy. No one really is anymore. It's all Trump, and challenging the mainstream narrative, and foreign elections. Politics. Politics isn't anarchy. Or have I missed something?

Interesting. That's not what drew me here. There was no such thing as "alt right" five years ago. I guess all the Trump support really did draw in a brand new audience.

Yeah, I asked you what questions you would ask someone to figure them out. What else would you do to understand another person you meet if not ask them questions? How do you engage another human being and judge them as irrational if you aren't asking them questions? Stare at them? How much info could they just be divulging to you without prompting in say five minutes time to where you know who they are? All you replied with was "watch the show" which wasn't an answer to my question. You never said how you would do it, but you did say you could, but you never backed that up. Am I to assume you have some direct brain scan abilities, or is it reasonable to think that you would use a series of questions to gauge another person? I mean, please tell me how you would meet someone, interact with them in a few minutes and conclude that they are irrational without asking questions. Are you looking at their appearance? Their skin color? Their laptop? Their car? I might be assuming you use questions, but you never actually divulged your methods, so I don't think assuming you use questions to figure people out is odd. If it isn't questions than correct me by divulging your actual method rather than saying I'm making a straw man. I think it's weird that you are just now calling it a strawman after 4 pages of not telling me your methods. Are we just playing a chess game? Are you trying to checkmate me? The entire idea of patience is that you are tolerating the amount of time something is taking. You described approaching irrationality with patience. You understand it takes time. Is that the same thing as giving someone "the benefit of the doubt"? That sounds more like you are handwaving away any current concerns you have in the now. How does this fit with your earlier stance that you can figure people out quickly. You said "Most people you'll know after the first 5 minutes." That doesn't sound patient to me. Five minutes? That isn't very long in the lifespan of a human much less the planet, or the universe or existence. So what's the difference? Why is one person in and out in five minutes for their irrationality and another person gets in? You mentioned the capacity for reason. Doesn't everyone have the capacity for reason? Are we talking about people who have had the part of their brain that deals with reason damaged in some way? How do you know who has brain damage to their reasoning center?

You say that you are looking for the capacity to reason, but we are right back to my point and you're proving it for me. It takes time. Hence why you brought up patience, and calmness. Those things create a relaxed environment. At the same time this flies in the face of what you were claiming earlier that you can figure someone out quickly with a few questions which you wouldn't even divulge. There is a contradiction in what you are telling others you do and what you actually do. You've let someone in your life you know is capable of irrationality, and has displayed it to you recently. What I want to know is what are you getting out of this relationship that makes you overlook the irrational behavior where as with anyone else you would have dismissed them for the same behavior?

You said: "being patient and honest and direct and calm when she is acting irrationally," Did you just discover this deep into the relationship that she acts irrationally sometimes? I don't think so. You knew from the start didn't you? If the answer is no then how good could your judgement have been? If the answer is yes then why did you let someone you know acts irrationally into your life? What are you getting out of it?

You proved my point. "She knows damn well that at my deepest level I have her health and happiness set as a priority. The actions show this and over time have allowed her a foundation to build a mountain of trust on." It took time to build the relationship. You didn't dismiss her after five minutes. Your problem with me is a problem you have with yourself. You have two conflicting views, hence trying to suggest that I need to think harder about why I'm here.

You can see them as a problem to be solved, but why would you do that? What is your motivation?

My issue? Don't know what that is supposed to mean. As for making judgements, I just don't think you can conclude who someone is in their entirety after just a few moments or a few words. For example, if someone is being manipulative they could tell you what they think you want to hear. So how do you know they are being disingenuous unless you keep probing, and keep probing? That's going to take a while, isn't it? There are also people who are capable of change, and who want to, but if you approach them looking to quickly dismiss them then you are approaching them as if they are a problem to be solved and not as a person. A lefty isn't just a set of political views inside a human shaped meat vessel. Do I trust my own judgment? Well, what does that mean? Judgement isn't just about negative things, right? I can judge someone as good, but a little misguided couldn't I? What would be the point of dismissing someone I thought was good just because they thought some things I think are irrational? I know several people both on the right and left who believe in God. Should I tell them I can't talk to them anymore because they believe in an invisible omnipotent deity? Is that trusting my judgement?

The problem isn't in your potential solutions, it's in your premise. When you approach someone as irrational, or judge them so after a few minutes of interacting then you change the way you interact with them from that point on. Suddenly they aren't a person, they are a problem to be fixed, or ignored. Reverse the situation. If a hard core communist walked up to you and said "Be a communist" and you were like "No way" and they proceeded to try to change your mind for thirty minutes or said "Meh, you're irrational" and walked away how would you respond to that? You would probably be just as likely to double down on your current world views or view the communist as a psycho for so easily dismissing you as irrational.

Well, I already responded to this in that other thread, so I guess just go re-read that. I still think the same thing.

Righties aren't quiet. Not since Trump won. I've heard some of the dumbest crap from the right since Trump won.

This is similar to the idea of the "light bulb moment". That "a-ha I've figured out the solution!" thing. We think it is this random moment of pure clarity, but really it is your brain connecting a bunch of things together that you have been considering over a period of time that then produces the "a-ha!" in a momentary fashion. But you didn't just "holy crap I have the cure to AIDS!" out of nowhere. You were working on it for months, and your brain was processing the information as you considered new things, and sometime even as you slept. If you were reading an article by a "far right extremist" having grown up in a lefty culture then surely that means that even lefties are capable of considering more than one side. How many righties do you think dismissed you as a leftist wacko when really you were open to ideas other than those in the immediate vicinity? I say give people more time. No one just snaps back the other direction in the span of a few words or a few minutes, and if they do then it's probably because they were already putting in the work.

The issue isn't as much about arguments as it is about time. Nothing in the universe just is the way it is automatically. In the case of some things it took millions or billions of years to become what it is now. Humans aren't an exception to this. Either in terms of the evolution of our species or the development of a single person. That's why I find this "you're being irrational... I'm done with you" way of dealing with people to not make sense. It's like looking at a jumbled mass of molten rocks floating in space and telling them "Be a planet. Oh, You're not going to do it? No sense spending more time here" That's silly. You can't just will the biology of another human into a shape that bypasses time. I've argued before that most of the people who have been on this site for a while, and especially pre-Trump, are here because they were already non-conformists. The extreme lefties who did a 180 to anarchy are exceptions. That's why it's difficult to go to a lefty and expect them to just turn around on a dime. Even those who did turn took time to do so. Think of it like this: If you throw a baby out into the woods, assuming it survives, how long would it take that child to adjust back to current society if found at five, ten, or fifteen years old? It would probably take the fifteen year old longer to adjust than the five year old, right? The same thing is true of that dude walking down the street who thinks taxation is a "social contract" or whatever. You can't say "Taxation is immoral" and expect him to immediately go "Holy crap, I never looked at it like that before. You're totally right dude"

I get the point you are trying to make, but you are forgetting about human behavior.

There are people who check out of human society everyday and prefer the company of animals and trees.

I'm reading lots of back and forth over the definition of what alt-right means.

I'm not the one who made a claim that I can't back up. It would be easy for you to just list the questions, but you didn't. Instead you engaged in a chess game. Hence trying to pull the "not an argument" move. You either can or can't list these questions, and at this point I'm convinced you can't. Therefore I'll take your advice and move on.

We don't need to go over anything. You made a claim that you can judge who is irrational in five minutes with a few questions. You haven't said what those questions are. At this point I'm just trying to figure out why not. Trying to deflect to "Watch Stef's show" isn't cutting it. There doesn't seem to be any good reason why you haven't provided me with a list. It's like me saying "I know five foods that will boost your metabolism" and someone responds "What are they?" and I respond back. "Go to the grocery store. That's where the foods are." Why respond back to a question asking for clarification of info with something that doesn't clarify anything? Are we just playing a chess game now? If so, I'm not interested in that. All I'm interested in is for you to directly answer my original question.

How is that an answer to my question?

That's not a lot of time. What questions would you ask in five minutes that would convince you that they were irrational?

But how do you know they aren't rational until you argue with them? How do you conclude after one conversation that someone is irrational?

I think the desire to want to be part of a tribe is something that no human can completely escape, which is why I think you have noticed that gay people act in a similar manner to each other. It probably doesn't help that there are so few gay people which creates a certain amount of ostracism which probably makes the pressure to conform to a standard within the gay community worse. This probably also plays into the instability you mentioned. It's difficult for anyone to be "stable" as a partner when they are seeking acceptance from a group of people.

Well, what do we mean by positive thinking? Are we talking about positive thinking during a bad situation? As a way to cope?