Quote:
Originally Posted by ratbastid
Also, what makes you think your emotions aren't even more open to manipulation?
|
They are open to manipulation. That is the first stage of controlling the issue, acknowledgment. I acknowledge this "fact" do you?
Recognizing that I can be manipulated and recognizing that I have been manipulated in the past I looked at what happened, how and why.
What I have learned is the following:
Stay away from women who can cry at will.
Don't negotiate anything in the presence of the aroma of cinnamon.
Make important decisions in the morning after a good night sleep.
If I get angry, walk away or at least try.
If what I hear sounds to good to be true it is.
Trust must be earned.
Quote:
|
Really, LITERALLY, all I have to do is float an American Flag graphic behind something to make a significant portion of the country agree with it. Appeals to fear, terror, nationalism, etc... These are all emotional manipulations.
|
Or, as a lady selling crafts said to me once. She said she could sell anything, all she needed to do was glue big eyes on it. I did not buy one of the rocks she was selling with big eyes glued on it, but I did watch as others did.
Quote:
|
To say "I feel something, and therefore to hell with facts" seems to me an inherently blind way to live.
|
I agree.
But, I am assuming you are suggesting that is the way I live. To the contrary and all I said was that I never ignore "feelings" or emotion. It plays a major role in what happens in the world. However, some have taken the position that "feelings" or emotions are not important and want me to believe that all they do is act on the "facts" without any emotional content.
Like I said at one point, the color blue elicits an emotional response in me, I know it does, I don't understand why, but I don't pretend that it is not real.
Quote:
Go re-read the sex education portion of the Sara Palin Quits thread. In that thread, you were staunchly for Palin's sex education policy, and also described how you thought sex ed should be conducted, and yet you were for Palin's policy with is the polar opposite of what you thought it should be, except that you support real sex ed, and also support Palin's policy, except where it might turn out to be in conflict with your views, which you don't know about, and even when pointed out to you, you see no conflict.
How is a reasonable, fact-based person supposed to interact with such bobbing and weaving?
|
I thought I was clear on that issue. I support abstinence only for children, so does she. I do not support "explicit" sex education, based on what I assume it means, she does not either. I support science based sex education and so does she. We differ on some of the subtle points as it relates to sex and marriage. But, I don't think teens should get married. And I don't think they should be engaging in sex. The question of sex and marriage is for adults and is a personal issue. Palin would support teaching children that marriage should come before sex. I simply believe trust comes before sex. I would leave the question of marriage for a home or church discussion, not a school discussion.
{added} Speaking of emotional manipulation I came across this little cartoon. Simply say it pays to understand "emotion":
Video - Clip: Warren Buffett's "Secret Millionaire's Club" - WSJ.com