plato85

I was brought up pretty far left. My family, my school, my city are all quite left. I had dissenting thoughts but I'd seen regularly the way people were treated when they expressed them. I remember one day I was in a cafe and I saw an article written by someone the left demonises as a far right extremist, I found some cute girl reading the same article over my shoulder. I expressed my embarrassment like I was accidentally reading it. Then I became even more embarrassed. That was the moment I realised I'd been completely brainwashed. I read his column there there was nothing extreme in it at all. The brainwashing unwraveled very quickly after that. It's ironic, but the left love criticising religions for controlling their people through fear and ostracism. They never acknowledge that they're an ideology too, and they fear going against their herd. After this experience, I then tried to see things from the oppositions point of view. One week later I googled 'I we being dumbed down?", I found John Taylor Gatto's video, which lead me to Plato's Republic and Aristotle's Ethics. So 3 months after that experience in the cafe, I'd replaced my whole world view with John Taylor Gatto, Plato and Aristotle. I don't see why it needs to take years to convince people to be rational. I did the unwravling of my brainwashing myself, but all I needed was one moment to realise that I was brain washed.

Interesting way of putting it DaVinci. Rather than pulling out the root of a tree, it may be more like un-weaving a jumper.

Atlas Shrugged is so damn accurate and thorough that things remind me of it every day. This is article in particular is uncanny: http://www.nigeriatoday.ng/2017/04/can-i-corrupt-i-dont-like-money-rotimi-amaechi/

The 'good life' is a life full or virtue and free of vice. Living virtuously brings you health, success, good relationships, happiness. So the question is how to live virtuously is a culture that encourages vice. the answer should be how you remove bad culture from your life. For instance, you might refuse to listen to commercial radio and you listen to philosophy podcasts instead.

You change yourself to fit the system rather than fight it. That sounds like the road to serfdom. I'm with you that arguing pure reason is not effective against a strong irrationality. That's why I'm asking for different ways to go about the problem. There's a huge population with an identical irrational relativist outlook. If I keep asking questions, eventually I might find the right question to get to the heart of the irrationality. If I find the right question then it might be easy to get through to everyone with that relativist outlook I'm not just trying the same thing over and over.

The heart of my question is how? You're describing methods that we all know don't work well, and telling me I'm wasting my effort, but that's not what I'm asking. I started this thread to look for new ideas, and try to figure out different methods I haven't thought of that might work. That's the heart of the question.

The question is illogical if you think irrational is an absolute term rather than a relative term. You said yourself that: ie [reason, evidence, deception, appeal to self interest]

Yes.

We need a better lexicon.

Sorry Livefree. I wasn't understanding your argument, I think I get it now. I thought you were trying to stop the debate. Interestingly it might come down to the premise of this debate - words have different meanings. I agree with the definition, but I take it to mean something very different to you. Irrational people by definition cannot see reason, but I don't think anyone uses this word in an absolute way. Humans are incredibly complicated. When we describe someone we use words in a broad way to describe their character traits. There's not much we can describe about people that is absolute, everything about people fits on a spectrum. We can say someone is happy, that doesn't mean they're in ecstasy. We can say someone is closed minded, incapable of changing their mind. When we say someone is greedy, that doesn't mean they're always greedy in every situation. We can say someone is irrational, that doesn't mean they're completely incapable of mathematics. Humans are highly versatile, and our personalities are constantly changing and adapting. We don't describe humans in objective terms. That doesn't make me a relativist. Please make it clear which argument you mean.

You're trolling LiveFree. Is it hard to admit you're the one who's closed minded? You're closed to the possibility that irrational people can see reason. I asked an open minded question and you're trying to tell me I'm closed minded about the possibility that they can't.

You're up to something strange. You're trying to stifle this debate for some reason. Asking how to connect to someone irrational is an open question, and you're trying to spin it so that it's closed minded to think that I can, and supposedly it's open minded to think that I can't. What are you up to?

I see evil everywhere. We live in a world where no one looks after their body or their minds. We eat and drink too much. People waste their time on Facebook writing narcissistic things and putting up photos of themselves. They sit in front of the TV mindlessly watching Masterchef every night. They listen to the most retarded music, full of ghetto lyrics. This is an evil world. Of course we can choose to avoid trash culture, but we're surrounded by people who are consumed by it. We can choose not tear down a historical architectural masterpiece to build an ugly modern apartment block, but we can't stop other people doing it.

As long as people have brains and they can think it's worth trying. I'm not resigned to defeat. Individual parenting is hardly going to bring about a renessance in a world where families are broken down and schools are actively working against students. How does a renessance occur unless we try to influence everyone? It's happened before. Im not sure if I'm asking this question on large terms or the smallest possible terms. If irrational people have their subconscious mind working against them how do we appeal to their subconscious?

Countries get the government they deserve. That means everyone is responsible to at least try to stand up for what they believe. Livefree - I don't know, but you might argue that it's the children that are switched off and on... then I would argue that the adults have to be switched on to bring up enlightened kids.

Because Mankind has gone through dark ages and renessence. Civilisation rises and falls over and over. It must be possible for people to be switched on and off. Because an authoritarian population leads to an authoritarian government, and there's people rioting against free speech, and protesting election results, and calling themselves liberals.

Hahaha. OK. But the truth doesn't impact on these people. And we've decided that the problem is at a subconscious level. these people are primed to yell 'nazi' when they hear 'Trump'. Theyre yelling 'fascist' at free speech rallies.

Hard to say. Possibly the demise of a newspaper that I'd grown up reading.

I'm 30. That's far too simplistic for an atheist. How does Plato and Aristotle's sense of morality fit into it?

I've grown up without morality. I mean I was raised into an amoral world. Atheist doesn't necessarily mean amoral, but I've realised that the secular world is not anchoured to morality at all, hence progressiveism (the idea that morals should continue to shift). Atheism is fine and good, but it seems to go together with amoralism and cynicism which I despise.

Thanks. I just finished reading Atlas Shrugged. I think it's my favourite book ever. Has she written anything else good? I watched The Fountain Head movie and it's put me off the book.

I'm Australian. I'm interested in the Moral Vacuum of the Eastern block, and how all of that played out. That is fascinating. I mean absolutely fascinating. Can you imagine everyone having no idea what is going on after an ideology collapsed. In truth I think the Russians have always had a seriously troubled grasp on reality though all the abuse they've had from their leaders. And I'm interested in what's involved in the sacred tradition / canon law / centralised doctrine. In particular I'm interested in morality.

I'm very interested in everything you're saying, but I don't know anything about what you're talking about. I'm going to need books and videos.

That is fascinating. It's a massive life decision coming to that point. Are they mostly converting though marriage? Or are they converting from other churches? This touches on what I find interesting about Christianity. I may not know specifically what each religion teaches, but I do see the character in people that results. I don't know what you mean by centralised set of doctrine and canon law. I assume you mean something other than the Bibles. What do the Protestants do without it?

There's been some good arguments here. It's time to up the ante. Given the arguments put forward in this thread I've rephrased the thread titled 'combatting newspeak'.