Personality Cafe banner

1 - 20 of 32 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,993 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Dear world at large,

Do you want to know what I call 'intellectually lazy'?

It's not considering that other people have different upbringing, different experiences, different preferences, different modes of communication, different inner expressions, different interests and different applications of logic to yours.

Seriously, I don't see what is the point for anyone to seek more knowledge or find your way in an argument by being too quick to pass judgment on just anybody else and without at least trying to be a bit more objective in your position.

Call it a value judgment on my part as an INFP, but hey, certain consequences of such lack in progression have already appeared as empirical evidence. I don't have to provide empirical evidence for everything that goes back to the basics of understanding human nature, simply because I am not your mother.



Sorry, it's basic knowledge that we're not the bornt the same and our joruneys are not the same, to believe yourself in being a member of a select few who appears most 'right' is irrational when you take into account what pure self interests have done to the human race in past and present.

If you think that you can only find all the answers, enough degree of intellect from just your university qualifications, from just reading philosophical or scientific textbooks, then you are seriously delusional. There's more to the world than the comfortable box you have created for yourself.

*Annoyed*
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
751 Posts
I love livejournal. Have you ever spent an afternoon on the new post screen, just reading the page and refreshing it and let the endless new posts roll in? There are so many posts, so many ideas. I've found some truly great blogs, ideas (and hilarious satire) over the years from that site.

If you were to ever find mine though, don't read it. It goes back more than six years and its a very embarassing read. Minefieldjournal is more of an accurate name for it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
929 Posts
simply because I am not your mother.
Did you require empirical evidence from your mother?
When i was younger, my truth was pretty much whatever she told me :p

You on the other hand, will be required to backup stuff you claim to be true, even more so after claiming that you shouldn't have to.

... on the positive side, atleast I'm not correcting your spelling? :D
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,026 Posts
You didn't seriously start an entire thread to passive-aggressively attack me, right? This is just a chance use of the same phrase. After all, it is not like that described anything that happened or addressed any of the real reasons for disagreement, or had, in fact, anything to do with the other thread wherein I used that phrase yesterday. Must be a coincidence. Surely you are not that sad. And considering your apparent disdain for philosophical texts just expressed, my pointing out your thread wasn't exactly philosophy couldn't possibly offend you, as you wouldn't, in that case, consider it an insult, just as it wasn't intended as one. Particularly as I said that people could find value in other things and was just explaining why I initially approached your question as I did and what I was trying to find, in order to clarify to a little misunderstanding. No. This would be a ludicrous reaction to my posts. Coincidence, surely.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
59 Posts
Not to be rude or anything, I'm afraid it's still going to sound rude, but I still feel like saying it, and I don't think it will really be that rude if I stress that I don't mean anything ill with it, considering this is not like in a Tolkien book, at least like I've read it is in a Tolkien book, and at least I don't think this is like in a Tolkien book, where you can see this really clear rhytm where, among other combinations, a well meant deed that isn't good automatically becomes evil on the whole; but in any case, in relevance to the original post of this thread, in a way you could say that you, izzie, by criticizing people for being intellectually lazy are by your own definition exactly that yourself as you're, kind of, in a way, criticizing people for not having the same understanding of the world as you have yourself which is the understanding that not everyone has the same understanding of the world that you have yourself. I mean. For someone out there, I'm pretty sure the case is so that there is their truth, and there are the wrong truths of others. If you say this truth is wrong, then it's word against word, and in such a case, considering that the concept of objectivity is absurd[1], at least I think it is, then you are just as much as this other person failing to recognize "that other people have different upbringing, different experiences, different preferences, different modes of communication, different inner expressions, different interests and different applications of logic [than] yours."

@[email protected]

In any case, to make it clear one last time, especially since none of the posts above have been very positive, I don't mean any ill by this. It was just what struck me reading your post, and it is really just another observation of something that completely makes sense to me, on second thought collapsing on itself, like everything, in accordance to at least some modern philosophy, par example so-called deconstruction, seems to do. Which is kind of frustrating. Or fun. Or neither. What do I know. But I can empathize with what you're saying, very much still, as I have many times been frustrated by people who don't even want to try to see things from the viewpoint of others. At least once today. But then again. What can you do ;_;.

[1] When I see the world, I see the world as a function of being myself. When a bird sees the world, the bird sees the world as this individual bird sees the world. And when a hypothetical God sees the world, he/she/it sees the world as himself/herself/itself. (Unless you're ominpotent, I guess. And God is in some religions exactly that. I guess, in that case, objectivity is, perhaps, not as absurd as original thought, but then again I'm not really that religious, though that isn't really quite true either, but nevermind and nevertheless:) By talking about objectivity we are talking about a world that no one has access to, because no one sees it like it really is but actually as themselves; and this is, thus, perhaps, talking about such a world, maybe, what do I know, at least in this conjecture, absurd.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,026 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
689 Posts
Not to be rude or anything, I'm afraid it's still going to sound rude, but I still feel like saying it, and I don't think it will really be that rude if I stress that I don't mean anything ill with it, considering this is not like in a Tolkien book, at least like I've read it is in a Tolkien book, and at least I don't think this is like in a Tolkien book, where you can see this really clear rhytm where, among other combinations, a well meant deed that isn't good automatically becomes evil on the whole; but in any case, in relevance to the original post of this thread, in a way you could say that you, izzie, by criticizing people for being intellectually lazy are by your own definition exactly that yourself as you're, kind of, in a way, criticizing people for not having the same understanding of the world as you have yourself which is the understanding that not everyone has the same understanding of the world that you have yourself. I mean. For someone out there, I'm pretty sure the case is so that there is their truth, and there are the wrong truths of others. If you say this truth is wrong, then it's word against word, and in such a case, considering that the concept of objectivity is absurd[1], at least I think it is, then you are just as much as this other person failing to recognize "that other people have different upbringing, different experiences, different preferences, different modes of communication, different inner expressions, different interests and different applications of logic [than] yours."

@[email protected]

In any case, to make it clear one last time, especially since none of the posts above have been very positive, I don't mean any ill by this. It was just what struck me reading your post, and it is really just another observation of something that completely makes sense to me, on second thought collapsing on itself, like everything, in accordance to at least some modern philosophy, par example so-called deconstruction, seems to do. Which is kind of frustrating. Or fun. Or neither. What do I know. But I can empathize with what you're saying, very much still, as I have many times been frustrated by people who don't even want to try to see things from the viewpoint of others. At least once today. But then again. What can you do ;_;.

[1] When I see the world, I see the world as a function of being myself. When a bird sees the world, the bird sees the world as this individual bird sees the world. And when a hypothetical God sees the world, he/she/it sees the world as himself/herself/itself. (Unless you're ominpotent, I guess. And God is in some religions exactly that. I guess, in that case, objectivity is, perhaps, not as absurd as original thought, but then again I'm not really that religious, though that isn't really quite true either, but nevermind and nevertheless:) By talking about objectivity we are talking about a world that no one has access to, because no one sees it like it really is but actually as themselves; and this is, thus, perhaps, talking about such a world, maybe, what do I know, at least in this conjecture, absurd.
How the hell did you manage to give me brainfreeze with a post on a forum?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
59 Posts
Two things:

1) Experience.
2) Experience.

Though if you want to do it yourself to someone someday there are a few things you can consciously start doing, and you might, if you have talent, manage it yourself one day! The first advice I have to give is to place rhythm over what the norms are when punctuating, as well as following your heart as opposed to googling when unsure about grammar. Second, if you start thinking about something else while writing about something, and if you think you can make it work, include it even though it has no whatsoever revelance to whatever you're writing about. The third, and in my personal opinion the most important advice, is to place a puzzling smiley in the middle of your post to subconsciously evoke the mood you want to inflict the reader with. And last, but not least, once you've finished your text, remove a sentence or three from it at random!

Good luck! :)

Remember! Keep practicing and anything is possible!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
689 Posts
Two things:

1) Experience.
2) Experience.

Though if you want to do it yourself to someone someday there are a few things you can consciously start doing, and you might, if you have talent, manage it yourself one day! The first advice I have to give is to place rhythm over what the norms are when punctuating, as well as following your heart as opposed to googling when unsure about grammar. Second, if you start thinking about something else while writing about something, and if you think you can make it work, include it even though it has no whatsoever revelance to whatever you're writing about. The third, and in my personal opinion the most important advice, is to place a puzzling smiley in the middle of your post to subconsciously evoke the mood you want to inflict the reader with. And last, but not least, once you've finished your text, remove a sentence or three from it at random!

Good luck! :)

Remember! Keep practicing and anything is possible!
Oh shit. I rofl'd.
Good show, my friend!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,993 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
You didn't seriously start an entire thread to passive-aggressively attack me, right? This is just a chance use of the same phrase. After all, it is not like that described anything that happened or addressed any of the real reasons for disagreement, or had, in fact, anything to do with the other thread wherein I used that phrase yesterday. Must be a coincidence. Surely you are not that sad. And considering your apparent disdain for philosophical texts just expressed, my pointing out your thread wasn't exactly philosophy couldn't possibly offend you, as you wouldn't, in that case, consider it an insult, just as it wasn't intended as one. Particularly as I said that people could find value in other things and was just explaining why I initially approached your question as I did and what I was trying to find, in order to clarify to a little misunderstanding. No. This would be a ludicrous reaction to my posts. Coincidence, surely.
Do not threaten me via PM. Sorry, when you wrote,''publicly call you out'' it sounds like a threat but maybe I was wrong.


This is what I told you in a Pm ''it was referred to ''world at large'' meaning in general. I was also thinking of how other people had annoyed me. If it was specific, I would say 'dear one individual' but the words ''intellectually lazy'' gave me a nice idea, I must admit it.''

I was referring to other people as well..It's like I'm provoking people to think. I am not being passive aggressive, I am being sarcastic and pushing people to consider other people's perspectives.

Because I get annoyed seeing people degrade others based on all the experiences I've encountered online.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,993 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
Did you require empirical evidence from your mother?
When i was younger, my truth was pretty much whatever she told me :p

You on the other hand, will be required to backup stuff you claim to be true, even more so after claiming that you shouldn't have to.

... on the positive side, atleast I'm not correcting your spelling? :D
Oh I'm so sorry you missed the sarcasm.

I guess.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,035 Posts
Lots of commas.
I miss having your focus. Thank you so much for posting.

Edit: One word of advice; you can extend your sentences even more than you do without losing out yourself or the reader, you should try.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,026 Posts
Do not threaten me via PM. Sorry, when you wrote,''publicly call you out'' it sounds like a threat but maybe I was wrong.


This is what I told you in a Pm ''it was referred to ''world at large'' meaning in general. I was also thinking of how other people had annoyed me. If it was specific, I would say 'dear one individual' but the words ''intellectually lazy'' gave me a nice idea, I must admit it.''

I was referring to other people as well..It's like I'm provoking people to think. I am not being passive aggressive, I am being sarcastic and pushing people to consider other people's perspectives.

Because I get annoyed seeing people degrade others based on all the experiences I've encountered online.
haha threat...
Thank you for agreeing to air discuss this privately via PM, rather than airing it all over the forum.

& try to make it more general next time, if it is indeed general, rather than having obvious referents to a discussion the same day wherein you got angry and rather insulting.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,993 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
haha threat...
Thank you for agreeing to air discuss this privately via PM, rather than airing it all over the forum.

& try to make it more general next time, if it is general, rather than having obvious referents to a discussion the same day wherein you got angry and rather insulting.
Sorryyyyyyyyyy, lirulin (there, a public apology)

I confess I was being my manipulative self again by being in my ''pushing people to think'' mood.

:crazy:

I wasn't angry actually :laughing:
 
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
Top