advertisement
Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
Poiuytl
Member
 
Poiuytl's Avatar
Poiuytl has no updates.
 
Member Since: May 2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 352
3 yr Member
Default Jun 19, 2019 at 02:17 PM
  #21
I find what you write highly interesting, TheUrOther, because it partly reflects experiences I have had. Especially the situation of being branded as a liar (or, for example, a manipulator) is very painful, because there is an inescapable paradox in a liar telling the truth. Every truth you tell or hold on to becomes another lie, or another piece of manipulation.

So, I think, the only option I have is to limit my contact, and curb my desire for cooperation from anyone. To start believing there will be no cooperation, ever. To stop expecting. That way at least I will be (slightly) less aggravated by the ****** situation I have. I have pain and depression, but sometimes I experience at least partially functioning interaction, which is valuable to me. Often the interaction becomes functional, because the other person relaxes, because they know they will not be asked for cooperation. People love it to be left alone. And sometimes I dare ask for something (or fall into the old habit), and then I become very happy if the answer is not evasive, nor negative, but becomes a statement of intention. Then it is important to not really believe it, so as not to become angry when nothing happens.

By the by (this is my theory) everybody starts forgetting what you are supposed to be (a liar, a manipulator) , and suddenly it becomes possible to experience some form of friendship, or even love - and this is a less technical term for cooperation, I guess.

Please note that I conflate you and I. Mainly because I didn't want to tell you what to do, but try to tell myself. I think I am different from you, but I see parallels.

I think it could be helpful, by the way, to replace anger with sadness (a kind of helpful hint). People never feel as threatened by sadness, and become slightly more willing to cooperate. Because it makes them happy to help a sad person, just as it makes them happy to attack an angry person.
Poiuytl is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
 
Thanks for this!
Iloivar

advertisement
Fuzzybear
Wisest Elder Ever
 
Fuzzybear's Avatar
Fuzzybear has no updates.
 
Member Since: Nov 2002
Location: Cave.
Posts: 96,301 (SuperPoster!)
20 yr Member
81.2k hugs
given
PC PoohBah!
Default Jun 19, 2019 at 05:02 PM
  #22
I haven’t read the whole thread yet. I’m replying (with this short post, I simply don’t have as much time here as some members do ...) as I find your posts interesting. I agree that bullies do tend to act on false information.

__________________
Fuzzybear is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Open Eyes
Legendary Wise Elder
 
Open Eyes's Avatar
Open Eyes Not a Unicorn, just another horse
 
Member Since: Mar 2011
Location: Northeast USA
Posts: 23,093 (SuperPoster!)
10 yr Member
21.3k hugs
given
PC PoohBah!
Default Jun 19, 2019 at 06:28 PM
  #23
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverTrees View Post
What does it mean to "discuss episodic" OpenEyes? Is that a psych term? It is unfamiliar to me.
When someone is struggling, especially with trauma that results in ptsd for example, if they can talk about the episodes/events they were traumatized they can pinpoint what about that event affected them and work through the affects of a traumatic event or episode. If a person experienced a lot of traumas since early childhood they may be so traumatized they don't even remember it in an espisodic way.

A person can be so sensitive as TheUrOther describes they can barely interact vocally normally. Some try therapy but end up disassociating, those patents are very hard to treat for example.
Open Eyes is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
 
Hugs from:
Fuzzybear
 
Thanks for this!
Fuzzybear
Anonymous44076
Guest
Anonymous44076 has no updates. Edit
 
Posts: n/a
Default Jun 19, 2019 at 06:55 PM
  #24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Open Eyes View Post
When someone is struggling, especially with trauma that results in ptsd for example, if they can talk about the episodes/events they were traumatized they can pinpoint what about that event affected them and work through the affects of a traumatic event or episode. If a person experienced a lot of traumas since early childhood they may be so traumatized they don't even remember it in an espisodic way.

A person can be so sensitive as TheUrOther describes they can barely interact vocally normally. Some try therapy but end up disassociating, those patents are very hard to treat for example.
Thank you for explaining @openeyes I know that chronic stress also changes how the hippocampus functions (temporarily I believe)....leading to memory problems.

As a PhD in psych, researcher, and assault survivor, Christine Blasey Ford gave a very good neurological explanation of the disconnect between trauma and memory. You reminded me of that with your explanation of "discussing episodic."
  Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
 
Thanks for this!
Open Eyes
Fuzzybear
Wisest Elder Ever
 
Fuzzybear's Avatar
Fuzzybear has no updates.
 
Member Since: Nov 2002
Location: Cave.
Posts: 96,301 (SuperPoster!)
20 yr Member
81.2k hugs
given
PC PoohBah!
Default Jun 19, 2019 at 07:51 PM
  #25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Open Eyes View Post
When someone is struggling, especially with trauma that results in ptsd for example, if they can talk about the episodes/events they were traumatized they can pinpoint what about that event affected them and work through the affects of a traumatic event or episode. If a person experienced a lot of traumas since early childhood they may be so traumatized they don't even remember it in an espisodic way.

A person can be so sensitive as TheUrOther describes they can barely interact vocally normally. Some try therapy but end up disassociating, those patents are very hard to treat for example.
Good post OE, thank you for your clarity.

__________________
Fuzzybear is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
TheUrOther
Member
TheUrOther has no updates.
 
Member Since: Jun 2017
Location: California, USA
Posts: 183
5 yr Member
Default Jun 19, 2019 at 09:45 PM
  #26
Quote:
Originally Posted by theoretical View Post
It takes practice. Conversationality is a skill.
A skill I can't develop because no one treats me as an equal - which only gets worse as my skill falls behind the age-appropriate average.

Quote:
Originally Posted by theoretical View Post
That you see someone coming up and talking to you as a "trespass" is concerning. That you fail to see how this negatively affects your interpersonal relationships is even more concerning.
It's not so much that I "fail" to see, it's that my moral code precedes everything else - including my very existence. I refuse to behave as barbarically as other people, no matter the cost. If I have to barge into people like a raider, that says more about humanity's moral bankruptcy than it does about any shortcoming I have. I want to be accepted, but I cannot accept myself if I act as badly as my abusers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Open Eyes View Post
When the body is stuck in anticipation of being attacked, it's extremely hard for the frontal lobe and executive part of the brain to function normally.
I'm not "stuck in anticipation of being attacked" in the sense that I'm always adrenalized. My predictions come from the logical analysis of scientific knowledge of human behavior applied to how people have consistently treated me in the past. I'm not panicking; I'm resigned to be treated badly and to be verbally or physically attacked. My "executive function" is operating fine. I have no problem living my life as long as no one else kicks my sandcastles over (i.e. actively and intentionally interfere with my life) but people can't seem to help themselves.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Open Eyes View Post
I am thinking that UrOther not even being able to discuss episodic must mean there is so much there he is reactive to a lot of things. Just composing his thoughts in writing like this for him IS a big deal. That's why he is so reactive, we must recognize this about him.
This does not describe me. I can discuss anything; I simply can't remember chains of events because my brain takes apart all events and analyzes them piece-by-piece, then stores the analysis and throws away the events. My memory is near-photographic for still pictures, but all events are decomposed into their ingredients. It's like watching a movie and only remembering the cast list afterward - except no one ever told me their names when I was young, so I can't remember names now either. So I remember individual acts, stripped of their context.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Poiuytl View Post
People never feel as threatened by sadness, and become slightly more willing to cooperate. Because it makes them happy to help a sad person, just as it makes them happy to attack an angry person.
You are correct that people are not threatened by sadness; you are incorrect that they would be triggered to help. People only see weakness in sadness; they only see vulnerable prey ready for slaughter. Every time I have been sad in public I am mocked incessantly, when I'm not simply assaulted.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Open Eyes View Post
If a person experienced a lot of traumas since early childhood they may be so traumatized they don't even remember it in an episodic way.
This is correct for me; my assault was so consistent and exclusive that remembering individual events was a waste of energy - I had to economize and turn my memorization engine into a mass meat grinder in order to process it all fast enough and be able to out-guess my opponents.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Open Eyes View Post
A person can be so sensitive as TheUrOther describes they can barely interact vocally normally. Some try therapy but end up disassociating, those patents are very hard to treat for example.
I don't interact vocally because I was punished every time I used my voice - either by my parents or by my peers. Staying silent was my best strategy.

Also, I have never disassociated in my life - I've had to face life at full volume with not so much as eyelids to dim it. People have done the equivalent of shove a firehose in my face and wonder why I'm drowning.

Incidentally, what would it say if a patient could not disassociate? What brain injury would that reveal? Does anyone know?

__________________
Please don't hug me.
TheUrOther is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
 
Hugs from:
Anonymous49426
Poiuytl
Member
 
Poiuytl's Avatar
Poiuytl has no updates.
 
Member Since: May 2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 352
3 yr Member
Default Jun 20, 2019 at 09:04 AM
  #27
I find it quite poignant that you like do see yourself like an automaton, a machine, a meat grinder, a camera, or anothe device which acts on an input-output principle. Is this impression of mine correct? Is that maybe a form of disassociation?

And if that's correct, does that not make communication with a fellow human even harder, because of the destructive impulses humans have towards objects? They show that, by the way, because they always have to dehumanise a person before destroying them, so as not to feel guilt (unless they are psychopaths, non-human themselves).
Poiuytl is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
TheUrOther
Member
TheUrOther has no updates.
 
Member Since: Jun 2017
Location: California, USA
Posts: 183
5 yr Member
Default Jun 20, 2019 at 11:00 AM
  #28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poiuytl View Post
I find it quite poignant that you like do see yourself like an automaton, a machine, a meat grinder, a camera, or anothe device which acts on an input-output principle. Is this impression of mine correct? Is that maybe a form of disassociation?

And if that's correct, does that not make communication with a fellow human even harder, because of the destructive impulses humans have towards objects? They show that, by the way, because they always have to dehumanise a person before destroying them, so as not to feel guilt (unless they are psychopaths, non-human themselves).

I see myself as a human being. A logical human being, but a human being nonetheless - complete with flaws.

I do use machine-like metaphors, because of my familiarity with machines - I am a computer programmer. I have had more interactions with machines than I've had with people.

And I'm well aware of the practice and system of dehumanization - I've witnessed it used on me my entire life, and I've seen it happen to others. The U.S. is full of it right now.

__________________
Please don't hug me.
TheUrOther is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Open Eyes
Legendary Wise Elder
 
Open Eyes's Avatar
Open Eyes Not a Unicorn, just another horse
 
Member Since: Mar 2011
Location: Northeast USA
Posts: 23,093 (SuperPoster!)
10 yr Member
21.3k hugs
given
PC PoohBah!
Default Jun 20, 2019 at 11:42 AM
  #29
Quote:
I don't interact vocally because I was punished every time I used my voice - either by my parents or by my peers. Staying silent was my best strategy.
Some cannot appreciate just how bad this can be. A child can be discouraged from trying to vocalize even before they can vocalize too. A crying child can end up being yelled at for just crying because they are hungry, gassy, wet and cold or experiencing pain from a tooth coming in. A child can face constant messages like "don't you dare say anything, you better shut up, you have to be quiet, don't you dare talk back, don't bother me now, stop your whining, just do as I say and don't talk back, I don't want to hear it go back to bed", and I am sure there are more one can add. If a child is not given any time to sit and talk with a parent or adult, that child can build up a lot of stress and frustrations. That can result in that child growing into an individual who has a very hard time communicating in a normal relaxed state.

I was trying to explain to my therapist recently how it was hard for me to pick an event in that often what happens is because there has been so many events I get flashes much like you describe. However, from what you have shared you were facing constant traumas and mistreatements. So you had to survive your environment in a very different way than many who may not be able to relate or know how to affectively support you the way you would like them to.
Open Eyes is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Poiuytl
Member
 
Poiuytl's Avatar
Poiuytl has no updates.
 
Member Since: May 2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 352
3 yr Member
Default Jun 20, 2019 at 01:50 PM
  #30
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheUrOther View Post
I see myself as a human being. A logical human being, but a human being nonetheless - complete with flaws.

I do use machine-like metaphors, because of my familiarity with machines - I am a computer programmer. I have had more interactions with machines than I've had with people.

And I'm well aware of the practice and system of dehumanization - I've witnessed it used on me my entire life, and I've seen it happen to others. The U.S. is full of it right now.
Many computer programmers rely so much on logic that they become a constant provocation to "normal" people, who act according to prefabricated thought patterns and very seldom logical. Often, in my experience, computer programmers become computer programmers because they prefer interaction with computers, because in many ways computers are like very kind, infinitely patient people. Have you ever considered that you are intrinsically different from "normal" people, like Spock from Kirk, with the only difference that you are an abused kind of Spock? Maybe it's only the fact that he had an empowering upbringing that allows Spock to raise an eyebrow and say "fascinating", when attacked.

I'm sorry if I'm projecting. I must say I find your style and phraseology quite amenable, and also convincing, as if I could like you. I don't think I would ever punch you.

Maybe the convincingness comes from the fact that your world of experience is a system - you see the logic in your abuse, and it becomes inescapable.
Poiuytl is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Poiuytl
Member
 
Poiuytl's Avatar
Poiuytl has no updates.
 
Member Since: May 2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 352
3 yr Member
Default Jun 20, 2019 at 01:56 PM
  #31
The Fundamental Problem you have with People - is it that they have an illogical behaviour? Or is it more like an illogical logic they follow?

And what is logic?

In The Wrath of Khan (1982), Spock says, “Logic clearly dictates that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.” Captain Kirk answers, “Or the one.”
Poiuytl is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
TheUrOther
Member
TheUrOther has no updates.
 
Member Since: Jun 2017
Location: California, USA
Posts: 183
5 yr Member
Default Jun 21, 2019 at 09:15 AM
  #32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poiuytl View Post
Many computer programmers rely so much on logic that they become a constant provocation to "normal" people, who act according to prefabricated thought patterns and very seldom logical.
People hated me long before I learned how to program.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Poiuytl View Post
Often, in my experience, computer programmers become computer programmers because they prefer interaction with computers, because in many ways computers are like very kind, infinitely patient people.
I program computers because they make sense; their output logically results from the input. You can't say that about people; There is no connection between how one acts toward them and what behavior one gets in return. One could be the nicest person to someone yet still get slugged with a baseball bat by that same person.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Poiuytl View Post
Have you ever considered that you are intrinsically different from "normal" people, like Spock from Kirk, with the only difference that you are an abused kind of Spock? Maybe it's only the fact that he had an empowering upbringing that allows Spock to raise an eyebrow and say "fascinating", when attacked.
No matter how "different" I am, it doesn't make me inhuman, and it doesn't make me deserve the treatment I receive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Poiuytl View Post
I'm sorry if I'm projecting. I must say I find your style and phraseology quite amenable, and also convincing, as if I could like you. I don't think I would ever punch you.
How is my "phraseology" different from others?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Poiuytl View Post
Maybe the convincingness comes from the fact that your world of experience is a system - you see the logic in your abuse, and it becomes inescapable.
The only way to understand the world is through logic, and the systematic breaking down the whole into its constituent parts. Our knowledge of science stems from this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Poiuytl View Post
The Fundamental Problem you have with People - is it that they have an illogical behaviour? Or is it more like an illogical logic they follow?
Their refusal to use logic and their tendency to wallow in emotion makes them behave nearly like animals. They literally enjoy being out of control, and they don't care who they harm in being so. It is their refusal to use logic that makes them see me under a cloud of fear and hate, instead of the obviously harmless person I am.

__________________
Please don't hug me.
TheUrOther is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
 
Thanks for this!
Poiuytl
WishfulThinker66
Magnate
 
WishfulThinker66's Avatar
WishfulThinker66 has no updates.
 
Member Since: Jun 2018
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,285
5 yr Member
117 hugs
given
Default Jun 21, 2019 at 02:17 PM
  #33
so, are you enjoying being out of control?
WishfulThinker66 is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Poiuytl
Member
 
Poiuytl's Avatar
Poiuytl has no updates.
 
Member Since: May 2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 352
3 yr Member
Default Jun 21, 2019 at 02:42 PM
  #34
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheUrOther View Post
People hated me long before I learned how to program.
Well, but still, maybe you started relying on logic long before you learned to program. My idea is that that might be the big crux of your problem with people.


Quote:
Originally Posted by TheUrOther View Post
How is my "phraseology" different from others?
I think it's spockish (without the stoicism). Maybe you're right, it's less your phraseology then the content of what you write that I am referring to. Or maybe it's part of your phraseology that you make many statements. And I want to repeat, I like that. Maybe it's a sign that you are less an empiricist and more of a logician. A bit like me. I tend to think the world through and in the end come up with my own design of the world, which does not always accurately reflect the world as a reality independent of me.
Poiuytl is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
TheUrOther
Member
TheUrOther has no updates.
 
Member Since: Jun 2017
Location: California, USA
Posts: 183
5 yr Member
Default Jun 22, 2019 at 11:56 AM
  #35
Quote:
Originally Posted by WishfulThinker66 View Post
so, are you enjoying being out of control?

I rigidly control myself. I am not under your control, and that is by design. I fight every day not to be controlled by others who would fully enslave me given the slightest chance.

What makes you think I'm "out of control"?

__________________
Please don't hug me.
TheUrOther is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
TheUrOther
Member
TheUrOther has no updates.
 
Member Since: Jun 2017
Location: California, USA
Posts: 183
5 yr Member
Default Jun 23, 2019 at 08:46 AM
  #36
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poiuytl View Post
Well, but still, maybe you started relying on logic long before you learned to program. My idea is that that might be the big crux of your problem with people.
I taught myself how to program when I was nine years old. I don't even remember much before then. And why would relying on logic be a problem? If people are illogical, that's their flaw, not mine. If they're lash out at me, that's their fault.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Poiuytl View Post
I think it's spockish (without the stoicism). Maybe you're right, it's less your phraseology then the content of what you write that I am referring to. Or maybe it's part of your phraseology that you make many statements. And I want to repeat, I like that. Maybe it's a sign that you are less an empiricist and more of a logician. A bit like me. I tend to think the world through and in the end come up with my own design of the world, which does not always accurately reflect the world as a reality independent of me.

I think of everything independently of people; I try to match my mind to objective reality as much as possible and flay any biases and inaccuracies out of my mind. Too many people rely on biases, interpretations and subjectivities and how people end up hating me - predators know how to manipulate those to feed false information to people and get them to do their bidding. No one cares enough about facts to sacrifice themselves to make sure that's all they learn. They'd much rather believe the comforting lie than the inconvenient truth.

__________________
Please don't hug me.
TheUrOther is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
 
Thanks for this!
Blknblu, Poiuytl
Poiuytl
Member
 
Poiuytl's Avatar
Poiuytl has no updates.
 
Member Since: May 2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 352
3 yr Member
Default Jun 23, 2019 at 01:43 PM
  #37
But doesn't logic always rely on assumptions? Is a logical world view possible without making assumptions about core conditions or assumptions of ethical nature (like the value of cooperation).

Have you read The Sea Wolf by Jack London? I highly recommend it to you. Very honestly. It has some romantic content and weaknesses, but at it's core it's the description of an absolutely cruel antagonist, who has developed an entirely logical world view based on his assumptions, his reading of the philosophers, his lack of any formal education.

And he places logic just as high as you do. Yet he is the perfect bully, while you are, as you describe yourself, a harmless, even gentle human being.
Poiuytl is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
TheUrOther
Member
TheUrOther has no updates.
 
Member Since: Jun 2017
Location: California, USA
Posts: 183
5 yr Member
Default Jun 23, 2019 at 03:20 PM
  #38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poiuytl View Post
But doesn't logic always rely on assumptions? Is a logical world view possible without making assumptions about core conditions or assumptions of ethical nature (like the value of cooperation).

On the contrary, to be truly logical one must not have any assumptions. One must always seek to fill the holes in one's knowledge with proven facts. Assumptions are precisely where errors come from. To err is human precisely because humans assume.

To solve a problem logically, one needs all the facts pertaining to that problem, and acknowledge one can't solve the problem if one doesn't have all the facts.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Poiuytl View Post
Have you read The Sea Wolf by Jack London? I highly recommend it to you. Very honestly. It has some romantic content and weaknesses, but at it's core it's the description of an absolutely cruel antagonist, who has developed an entirely logical world view based on his assumptions, his reading of the philosophers, his lack of any formal education.

And he places logic just as high as you do. Yet he is the perfect bully, while you are, as you describe yourself, a harmless, even gentle human being.

While I have read others of London's works, I don't think I've read the Sea Wolf. I don't remember it in any case. But if the antagonist is making assumptions - especially if he has no education on logic only relying on philosophers - then it would make sense that the result would be flawed.

There is a phrase used in computer science: Garbage in; Garbage out. It's used to describe the idea that the outputs can only be as good as the inputs. If the premises of an argument are flawed, no amount of logic can save you. So it's no surprise to me that a man who fed himself a half-diet of flawed philosophers and believed himself a sage would end up a flawed man himself. I make a point of practicing informational hygiene to avoid this; only getting information from peer-reviewed sources or that which that be confirmed by both myself and by third parties. The premises must be as flawless as the logic, or the whole argument is doomed.


And to be perfectly honest, I would not call myself "gentle". In fact, "rough around the edges" would not be an inaccurate description.

__________________
Please don't hug me.
TheUrOther is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Poiuytl
Member
 
Poiuytl's Avatar
Poiuytl has no updates.
 
Member Since: May 2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 352
3 yr Member
Default Jun 23, 2019 at 08:08 PM
  #39
I disagree about your assumption that assumptions have no part in logical reasoning. The fact is, there can be no logical reasoning without assumptions (which is my assumption).

See for example this argument:

The production of pencil sharpeners can no longer be profitable. This is because various factors have decreased demand for pencil sharpeners. First, pens are used far more than they once were. Second, those who use pencils often use mechanical pencils. Finally, increased use of electronics has decreased the need for handwriting.

The argument depends on which of the following assumptions?

Availability of mechanical pencils has increased

Students no longer prefer pencils over pens for math calculations

Production of pencil sharpeners cannot be profitable if there is a decreased demand for them

Anything that can be accomplished with pencils can also be accomplished with electronics

Pencil sharpeners are only in demand for the purpose of sharpening pencils

So if I say, cooperation is good for people - therefore the only logical interaction between people is cooperation - people who refuse cooperation act illogical. Which is the assumption therein? Or are there several assumptions? Or is this not a reasonable example for logical reasoning?
Poiuytl is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
TheUrOther
Member
TheUrOther has no updates.
 
Member Since: Jun 2017
Location: California, USA
Posts: 183
5 yr Member
Default Jun 23, 2019 at 09:13 PM
  #40
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poiuytl View Post
I disagree about your assumption that assumptions have no part in logical reasoning. The fact is, there can be no logical reasoning without assumptions (which is my assumption).

See for example this argument:

The production of pencil sharpeners can no longer be profitable. This is because various factors have decreased demand for pencil sharpeners. First, pens are used far more than they once were. Second, those who use pencils often use mechanical pencils. Finally, increased use of electronics has decreased the need for handwriting.

The argument depends on which of the following assumptions?

Availability of mechanical pencils has increased

Students no longer prefer pencils over pens for math calculations

Production of pencil sharpeners cannot be profitable if there is a decreased demand for them

Anything that can be accomplished with pencils can also be accomplished with electronics

Pencil sharpeners are only in demand for the purpose of sharpening pencils

You chose to assume all those things. One can go out and prove or disprove for certain all of those things you mentioned. You didn't prove that assumptions are necessary.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Poiuytl View Post
So if I say, cooperation is good for people - therefore the only logical interaction between people is cooperation - people who refuse cooperation act illogical. Which is the assumption therein? Or are there several assumptions? Or is this not a reasonable example for logical reasoning?

Logical arguments require proven facts, not assumptions. Once you introduce assumptions into the mix, you're no longer arguing from logic - you're arguing hypotheticals.

__________________
Please don't hug me.
TheUrOther is offline   Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:50 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® — Copyright © 2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.



 

My Support Forums

My Support Forums is the online community that was originally begun as the Psych Central Forums in 2001. It now runs as an independent self-help support group community for mental health, personality, and psychological issues and is overseen by a group of dedicated, caring volunteers from around the world.

 

Helplines and Lifelines

The material on this site is for informational purposes only, and is not a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis or treatment provided by a qualified health care provider.

Always consult your doctor or mental health professional before trying anything you read here.