If reality offends you, maybe you shouldn't be on FDR?

[ZMorris]

I recently joined the 'community' and I must say that I am EXTREMELY surprised how little rationality there is within the community.  I was under the overwhelming impression that FDR was a community of philosophers?  "Philosophy: examination of basic concepts: the branch of knowledge or academic study devoted to the systematic examination of basic concepts such as truth, existence, reality, causality, and freedom."

 

I joined with the main purpose of trying to help FDR, and the people of FDR, by applying my skill set that has come to be very useful and money saving for myself and those around me.  (unrelated to philosophy)  From a personal perspective I also hoped to gain a little sanity by interacting with people who are capable of processing reality.  Instead, I continually get badgered with emotional responses to an objective observation of reality.  I am shocked to find that the greater percentage of those I have interacted with, and the posts that I have read, have been basically the same as everyday life.  The level of confirmation bias appears to be the same as the usual sheeple I run across everyday.  Same bias, different views seems to be the norm.

 

Has anyone else had the same experience?  Anyone else get the usual 'white knight' 'your opinion' 'your views' type of regurgitated propaganda or is it something that I am personally causing?

 

PS the 'opinion' narrative is extra annoying...even kids in public schools are taught the difference between opinion and fact!?!?!?  BANG HEAD HERE!!  My favorite color is black=opinion.  Rocks fall down=fact.  I like mexican food=opinion.  Taxation is theft=fact.

[Horseradish]

Do you have any examples of a topic you've brought up and what the responses were?

[Devon Gibbons]

" I continually get badgered with emotional responses to an objective observation of reality.  I am shocked to find that the greater percentage of those I have interacted with, and the posts that I have read, have been basically the same as everyday life."

 

 

You have 3 posts, and no one has responded to you. How can you say you have "interacted" with people? Interaction requires two parties.

 

 

Do you have any examples of a topic you've brought up and what the responses were?

[ZMorris]

The first one I got burned on was the observation that women sell them self, men buy women...directly saying it as opposed to the bs dancing around the topic people do.  Another member reworded it as prostitution and I replied with something along the lines of 'long term prostitution would be an accurate statement'

 

The next day I stumbled across the 'Estrogen Based' video and Stefan basically got the same feedback.  I just don't understand why people are so reluctant to accept reality!?  I hate that its true!

Via chat marginalist.  And now your comment.

Is this philosophy or a pissing contest?

[labmath2]

My favorite color is black=opinion.  Rocks fall down=fact.  I like mexican food=opinion.  Taxation is theft=fact.

 

Well, let me challenge you a bit if you don't mind.

How is "taxation is theft=fact?" The problem is that no one is being forced to live in the US and everyone that lives in the US or Canada knows a condition for living in those places is having to pay tax. If this were North Korea then i would understand that you have no choice. While i know people will jump on me for this, but if you want to live in someone else's house, you have to pay rent. You can complain about how that is theft because you wish to live there without paying rent, but it wont change the fact that you can leave anytime you want and not have to pay rent.

[Devon Gibbons]

Women sell them self, men buy women.

 

"That sounds like prostitution!"

 

NO, more accurately, it is long term prostitution.

 

 

 

I don't see how your addition of long term prostitution vs prostitution constitutes your extrapolation as being truer; and btw what do you even mean by long term? 

[Freedomain]

If you want to be a dick, maybe FDR isn't for you either...

[Carl Green]

Hi again ZMorris. I enjoyed our chat earlier this week.

 

Maybe you're just noticing the irrational content more so than the rational. Like, a hyper sensitivity to it? I dunno, just the first thing that I thought of when reading that.

[Magnus]

Well, let me challenge you a bit if you don't mind.How is "taxation is theft=fact?" The problem is that no one is being forced to live in the US and everyone that lives in the US or Canada knows a condition for living in those places is having to pay tax. If this were North Korea then i would understand that you have no choice. While i know people will jump on me for this, but if you want to live in someone else's house, you have to pay rent. You can complain about how that is theft because you wish to live there without paying rent, but it wont change the fact that you can leave anytime you want and not have to pay rent.

Taxation is theft, but that an ethical assertion, not a fact. Actually, taxation is more akin to slavery than ordinary theft. As for the original post, I would suggest initiating half a dozen philosophical propositions, and see what kind of response you get. Maybe make 10 or so videos, if that's your thing. We tend to get the responses we invite. If you don't like your responses, I'd suggest examining your invitations.

[Alan C.]

...I continually get badgered with emotional responses to an objective observation of reality.

 

What was the objective, observation of reality to which you were emotionally badgered?

[mick_towe]

I am having trouble understanding how the issues zMorris puts forward (besides the criticism of FDR n the current top post) would have caused FDR posters to "badger" him.

 

The first one I got burned on was the observation that women sell them self, men buy women...directly saying it as opposed to the bs dancing around the topic people do.  Another member reworded it as prostitution and I replied with something along the lines of 'long term prostitution would be an accurate statement'

 

The next day I stumbled across the 'Estrogen Based' video and Stefan basically got the same feedback.  I just don't understand why people are so reluctant to accept reality!?  I hate that its true!

 

I don't really see anything in here that my impression of the average FDR-er would be terribly suprised or offended by. ZMorris, are you sure you aren't projecting said badgerment? Or maybe you are interpreting a thing one or two people said as being the opinions of the majority on here?

[ProfessionalTeabagger]

Shame on you FDR community. You failed to meet the standards of Zmorris. Go to your room and think about what you've done.

[dsayers]

Is this philosophy or a pissing contest?

 

The opening post, with the exception of defining philosophy, looks more like a pissing contest than philosophy. Reading just that, I had no idea what you were talking about. I too wondered where this could be coming from with just a few posts. At no point did you reference the chat room or any specifics. Instead, you collectivized "this community" and hurled accusations at it. Is that philosophy or a pissing contest?

 

How is "taxation is theft=fact?" The problem is that no one is being forced to live in the US and everyone that lives in the US or Canada knows a condition for living in those places is having to pay tax.

 

The problem is that nobody is being forced to get punched in the face and everyone that stands in the path of somebody taking a swing knows a condition of standing there is getting punched in the face. This begs the question of whether or not the person throwing a punch (or taxing) is immoral (lacking consent).

[ZMorris]

First of all I would like to express appreciation to Kristi-Lemanakmelo, Alan, Magnus and Carl Bartelt for the objective and philosophical replies.  Carl, I believe you are correct that my subjective view is probably hyper-sensitive.

 

Marginalist, I said 'long term prostitution would be an accurate statement' NOT 'long term prostitution would be a MORE accurate statement'

 

Dsayers, I had picked you out as the most consistently rational person on the site so far.  Your reply has me perplexed.  In regards to 'collectivized "this community" and hurled accusations at it': it is a generalization, by definition not subjective or all inclusive.  I referenced a perceived majority and asked if anyone else 'had this experience' or was I 'personally causing' it.  I am uncertain what accusations you are referring to.

 

 

MMD, name calling is definitely on the list of things I would not expect on a philosophy forum.

 

Professionalteabagger, love the name lol....did you have an argument to propose or just stopped by to project some passive aggression my way?

 

A lot of these replies are what I was talking about and in line with my proposed thesis.

 

Taxation IS theft.  (Theft: stealing of property: the act or crime of stealing somebody else's property.  Stealing: take something unlawfully: to take something that belongs to somebody else, illegally or without the owner's permission)  Re-framing the circumstances around the theft changes nothing.  Argument that it is not theft appears to me to be the kind of 'grey area' foggy thinking that the masters would love us to have.

short term prostitution: trading a sexual favor for money.

long term prostitution: trading a relationship for money.

I post offering to save people a SUBSTANTIAL amount of money free of charge and get 1 positive review...someone calls me a dick and he gets 3...

[ProfessionalTeabagger]

This is a concern troll. Can 

 

Professionalteabagger, love the name lol....did you have an argument to propose or just stopped by to project some passive aggression my way?

 

 

 

What argument could I make? Your thesis is obviously correct and you are clearly sincere and these members are treating you like you're some concern-troll dickhead. You have demonstrated that reality offends us. I'm sorry FDR is so full of irrational people and was not what you were expecting. Obviously you'll be leaving and going somewhere else that meets your standards. I for one am sorry you're going but I promise I will try to up my game and I hope my fellow FDR members will do the same. All the best in your future away from FDR. Best wishes.

 

PT.

[ZMorris]

Yet another proof...

 

NOT MY STANDARD!!!!!  THE STANDARD COMES FROM PHILOSOPHY!!!!!

 

Asinine replies like that are better suited on Facebook.  (notice that asinine is not name calling like dickhead is)

[ProfessionalTeabagger]

Yet another proof...

 

NOT MY STANDARD!!!!!  THE STANDARD COMES PHILOSOPHY!!!!!

 

Asinine replies like that are better suited on Facebook.  (notice that asinine is not name calling like dickhead is)

I am deeply sorry if you thought I was calling you that. I was just pointing out that's how you're being treated (like a disingenuous concern troll creep). Your thesis just keeps getting proved. Anyone who does not provide a response you like proves your thesis. That's genius.

Yes those standards are not yours but philosophy's. Again I'm sorry this forum does not meet the standard of philosophy and as you require such a standard I am sorry that you'll be leaving this forum. Maybe in a few years we'll have upped our rational game but until then I wish you the best in your en-devours and am sorry you cannot continue to post on FDR. I think everyone here should wish you the best and we can part on good terms.

Agreed? 

[cynicist]

Is this philosophy or a pissing contest?

 

You turned it into a pissing contest when you suggested that people here aren't capable of processing reality... and you're seriously wishing people were more objective? Do you not see the contradiction here?

[dsayers]

I am uncertain what accusations you are referring to.

 

In the opening post, you said the community has surprisingly little rationality, are not capable of processing reality, badger with emotional responses, and are ripe with confirmation bias.

 

If I may be so bold, assuming your solicitation of feedback is sincere, it might be that you have difficulty considering how you land for other people. I do not say this from an ivory tower as this is one of my biggest weaknesses also. If you would indulge me, I'd like to digress a bit to sort of explain what I'm talking about.

 

I've never been in the chat room of this community. For all I know, it's an entirely different experience than the forum itself, possibly even with different people participating in one and not the other, etc. For this reason alone, I have two conclusions that might be of use for you.

 

The first is the collectivization. Maybe it wasn't intentional--and yes, I see that half way through your OP, you do quality "the greater percentage of those I have interacted with"--but I know that when I first read your post, I had no idea what you were talking about. The other is that you made this thread with what appeared to be a collective conclusion, with almost no post history.

 

Don't get me wrong; I'm not one of those forum fighters who use things like post count to marginalize people. However, when what you're talking about is conclusions about the community, it helps to have an established presence so that we have reason to believe your assessment could be accurate. Does that make sense?

 

I haven't been here very long. However, since the topics this forum tackles tends to go against the status quo, I've noticed that it's not uncommon for "outsiders" to make accounts for any number of reasons other than pursuit of philosophy. This definitely looked like one to me. I'm not entirely convinced that it's not.

 

Why do I say that? Look at your interaction with Teabagger. Without context into what you may know about each other, it would appear that his words towards you were quite provacative. I've been on the receiving end myself. However, since I've listened to this show and pursued self-knowledge, it almost never drives me to retaliation. Because I understand that type of postuting is far more likely to be unprocessed trauma than to actually have anything to do with me.

 

I guess what I'm saying is that the thread appears to hold the community accountable for not being philosophical. Yet at the same time, much of what I'm seeing from you also doesn't appear to be philosophical. I count self-knowledge as philosohy, and in fact the most important aspect.

 

Anyways, thank you for the flattering feedback. When I first saw a post from somebody named ZMorris yesterday, I wanted to greet you with a, "Would you be offended if I called you preppy?" I elected not to just in case you didn't get the joke. Would you have?

[LovePrevails]

make a strong case rather than saying we don't accept facts.

[greekredemption]

This is a site for the philosophy of FDR, not philosophy.

[cynicist]

This is a site for the philosophy of FDR, not philosophy.

 

Then why are you here? 

[greekredemption]

Then why are you here? 

Because I am interested in the philosophy of FDR.

[cynicist]

I don't go to christian forums and debate theism because I know they are crazy. If you think that people in the community are unable to be objective, that it's just a cult of opinion, then participating makes you irrational. Complaining about it even more so.

[greekredemption]

I don't go to christian forums and debate theism because I know they are crazy. If you think that people in the community are unable to be objective, that it's just a cult of opinion, then participating makes you irrational. Complaining about it even more so.

Did I say those things? 

[cynicist]

Did I say those things? 

 

You said this site is not for philosophy, it's for the philosophy of FDR. Maybe I misunderstood, but that sounds like you are suggesting this site is focused on opinion rather than fact. Philosophy is the study of knowledge, reality, existence. There is no such thing as the 'philosophy of FDR', just as there is no such thing as Stefan Molyneux's brand of truth. It's either truth or it's not.

[greekredemption]

You said this site is not for philosophy, it's for the philosophy of FDR. Maybe I misunderstood, but that sounds like you are suggesting this site is focused on opinion rather than fact. Philosophy is the study of knowledge, reality, existence. There is no such thing as the 'philosophy of FDR', just as there is no such thing as Stefan Molyneux's brand of truth. It's either truth or it's not.

I'm saying this site focuses on the philosophy of FDR. Molyneuxian philosophy, perhaps? I don't know. But it isn't a site for the general discussion of philosophy or philosophies. In the same way a Marxist forum is likely to spend most of its time discussing the ideas of Marx, Engels, et al, rather than philosophy in general.

 

None of this intends to make a value judgement about anything, it's just an honest description. If the OP wants a discussion on philosophy in general, this is not the site for him.

[cynicist]

I'm saying this site focuses on the philosophy of FDR. Molyneuxian philosophy, perhaps? I don't know. But it isn't a site for the general discussion of philosophy or philosophies. In the same way a Marxist forum is likely to spend most of its time discussing the ideas of Marx, Engels, et al, rather than philosophy in general.

 

None of this intends to make a value judgement about anything, it's just an honest description. If the OP wants a discussion on philosophy in general, this is not the site for him.

 

So in other words this site is just a cult that worships the ideas of Stefan. It's not a place to discuss ideas that are philosophically true irrespective of who they originate from. 

[greekredemption]

So in other words this site is just a cult that worships the ideas of Stefan. It's not a place to discuss ideas that are philosophically true irrespective of who they originate from. 

Why do you keep twisting my words? Nothing I've said even remotely implies that. 

 

This site is from the outset quite obviously for FDR philosophy. I mean, look at the forum's guidelines:

 

EthicsIf you want to post about ethical theories, it is important to become familiar with the basic concepts of Universally Preferable Behavior.

 

[JamesP]

It is a failure to process reality to complain to people who cannot process reality that they are not processing reality.

[dsayers]

I'm saying this site focuses on the philosophy of FDR. Molyneuxian philosophy, perhaps? I don't know. But it isn't a site for the general discussion of philosophy or philosophies

 

Philosophy not being plural aside, perhaps you could help to articulate your position if you could provide where you observe "Molyneuxian philosophy" departing from philosophy.

[cynicist]

Why do you keep twisting my words? Nothing I've said even remotely implies that. 

 

You are saying this site is not for discussing philosophy in general, it's for discussing Stefan's brand of philosophy. It sounds more neutral but the meaning is exactly the same.

 

This site is from the outset quite obviously for FDR philosophy. I mean, look at the forum's guidelines:

 

Ethics

If you want to post about ethical theories, it is important to become familiar with the basic concepts of Universally Preferable Behavior.

 

That's because UPB is a rigorous, philosophical approach to ethics. Not because it's Stefan's take on it. If someone proved that UPB was an incoherent mess of an idea, divorced from the truth, then that guideline wouldn't be there.

[greekredemption]

Philosophy not being plural aside, perhaps you could help to articulate your position if you could provide where you observe "Molyneuxian philosophy" departing from philosophy.

It doesn't depart from philosophy. It is part of philosophy where the plural 'philosophies' refers to the parts, even though those parts aren't necessarily discrete. This site focuses on Molyneux's philosophy. 

 

You are saying this site is not for discussing philosophy in general, it's for discussing Stefan's brand of philosophy. It sounds more neutral but the content is the same.

 

 

That's because UPB is a rigorous, philosophical approach to ethics. Not because it's Stefan's take on it. If someone proved that UPB was an incoherent mess of an idea, divorced from the truth, then that guideline wouldn't be there.

There are many sites on the internet dedicated to the discussion of a particular philosophy (part of philosophy, however you want to describe it). That's whether it's anarcho-capitalism as a whole, specific types like here at FDR, quite a few on objectivism, Marxism, the mad thoughts of Slavoj Zizek, the British empiricists, etc, etc. I am curious as to why such a mundane statement - that there are sites on the internet dedicated to particular subjects - automatically brought you to the conclusion that I was saying this place in particular is "cult"-like.

 

And maybe UPB is a rigorous approach to ethics. But it is by no means the only one even on its own terms... borrowing as it does from Kant, Rand, Locke, and more. I should state that there is nothing wrong with this, but the particular focus on UPB still suggests to me that this site is for discussion of Molyneux's philosophy. As I said earlier in this post, that's just fine and dandy. Every part of philosophy has its adherents and its websites.

 

edit: I have to reiterate that nothing I've said is particularly controversial. If you go to a Marxism forum and become frustrated that there isn't general discussion of all different types of philosophy going on, it's a bit strange to lash out when quite obviously it is a forum for the discussion of Marx's ideas. Hence why I suggested the OP needs to find some other place for general discussion.

[cynicist]

edit: I have to reiterate that nothing I've said is particularly controversial. If you go to a Marxism forum and become frustrated that there isn't general discussion of all different types of philosophy going on, it's a bit strange to lash out when quite obviously it is a forum for the discussion of Marx's ideas. Hence why I suggested the OP needs to find some other place for general discussion.

 

/facepalm

 

So at best you are advising this guy on a site that you don't know anything about. 

[Pepin]

These sorts of posts seem to contain a large unawareness of the audience they are dealing with. How are people on the forum expected to react to a sum of conclusions without arguments? Even if arguments are presented, if they run completely contrary to the general philosophy accepted here, it should be assumed that they need to be high quality and presented in the most understandable manner possible to assist in convincing others.

 

If an evolutionist is trying to convince a creationist, they realize who they are talking to, and present their arguments in a way that can be accepted and understood by the audience. When I used to spend a lot of time arguing with liberals on various forums, I spent a lot of time into my arguments, because I understood that I'd need high quality material to convince them. Just stating my conclusions and not spending the majority of the time on arguments would have not worked.

 

I don't quite understand why people make these types of posts. It isn't exactly trolling, I feel like it has more to do with the person getting a reaction out of themselves.