"When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.” -Socrates
As soon as I saw this, I immediately thought of the CF, and what many of our conversations devolve into.
Something to think about.
So you can stick your Mommy scolding in your pipe.....
PutZ doesnt count as a person here so......if you are unfamiliar with his 2 years of being a total ass here then you should do some research.
Socrates had a theory about that (see above), but to a certain extent I think there is a different phenomenon at play here also.
It's akin to what I refer to as the "all in-all the time" concept, and the ability (or inability in some cases) of some to evaluate a specific opinion, independent from the person holding it.
We see it play out here all the time. A good example are the "never-Trumpers" and the "always-Trumpers" and how each side reacts to anyone straying from their respective reservation.
There is a difference in community discussion and disrespectful name calling. Communication requires listening too. It seems like you all just come her to post your opinion, wait for an opposing view, then pounce but never trying to understand a different point of view. I don't have any issue with an occasional respective jab but it's like some here on the CF thrive on hatred and conflict. It's the straight out hatred for fellow bowhunters with a different opinion I can't stand. It's exhausting... I come here because I want to hear other bowhunters points-of-view because I want to understand others prospective. I think it makes you a better person to hear all sides...Fox news, MSNBC, CNN, NPR, etc.
Spike and JTV...why do you come to the CF? I'm honestly curious why you like the CF. No BS. What do you get out of this?
I call Obama an America hating race pimp because he is an America hating race pimp. I call it as I see it, I do not ask anyone else to agree with me. There are reasons I see Obama as an America hating race pimp. I call a duck a duck, and a fool a fool. I call a conservative a conservative, and a liberal a liberal. The "new" liberal mantra is to eliminate labels, do not characterize anyone or anything. If you are dumb enough to follow the lead of liberalism and its socialist masters then you have earned the title of blind and dumb sheep. You're going to eat what you're fed, don't be offended if I whiz on your oats.
While it might appear that way, I don't think that's actually the case. There are quite a few independent thinkers here (on both sides of the political spectrum), they just aren't as noticeable over the name calling, chest pumping, and vulgar outbursts of the few that you speak of.
This thread does seem to support Socrates' premise however.
I think you might have missed the point Trax. You are welcome to have that opinion (one which I tend to agree with), and make your case as to why you think it's true. And the people who disagree with you can make their case as to why they think it's not true. Nothing wrong with that. That's what a debate is.
However, if I just come on here and call you an "dipshit," a "dweeb," a "pissant" or a "maroon," without making any attempt to refute your opinion, I have indeed lost the debate.
Jimbo I'm going to respectfully disagree. It can change and would if we will do our part to make it happen. I've been on here longer than most I believe. I have watched the degree of debate go down like a ship at sea the last few years. We used to have the liberal element that could (and would), make their points in a reasonable fashion. Granted the points weren't right much of the time (OK, almost all the time), but they were coherent, civil and well written. We had the conservative faction that could (and would) respond in an equally civil fashion even while ripping the liberal points to shreds. There was little name calling, and most of it was done in fun. Posts were seldom vulgar in nature of the response. Not a lot of minds were changed then either, but we had respect for each other. Some of us even met for a live debate between our leading conservative (who was from Tennessee), and our main liberal our of California. Neither one is with us today, one got disgusted at the treatment he was receiving towards the end, and the other sadly passed away not too long after the debate,
We had a lot of fun back then, shared a lot of good information, and even gave each other things to think about and an insight into the other's way of thinking. I am saddened by the actions and words of some on here (all sides), and yet glad there are some that hold themselves above the pettiness of others. Socrates made a good point with the quote Kevin shared and this topic reminded me of a phrase we used to hear on here quite a bit which most of you won't remember: "What would Tennbow say?"
I miss the adventures wherein everybody added a line or two ("And then....") to a continuing story! We were a more cohesive group, even though we still had a holier-than-thou or two. The dialog was much more civil and the threads much more educational. Many have called for a return to civility at different times but oftentimes the responses match the original comments.
I cannot blame a guy for calling somebody a dumbass whn he himself suffered that same attack from the dumbass in question just last week.
I also cannot abide a guy like PutZ who, after two years of over 40 false registrations during which he has been nothing but an intentional shat stirrer decides to use his real name and wants to all upper crusty!!!! Every one of those personas got fair treatment from me until I figured out it was just another Sybilarity, at which point I treated him as he deserves.
KPC walking into the Dollar General
Love that initial Socrates quote. A good thing to keep in mind for sure. Point blank, I do find the opinions of others here helpful. It makes me seek out info and review ideas that I may not have otherwise. Even if I try to seek out ideas different from my own, other folks will always come up with different angles or corridors of thought to consider. That's awesome!
I'm a newbie to the CF, historically I've focused my (excessive) bowsite time on the state forums and now and then the main hunting page. But, despite suspecting I should duck and cover for my fairly left of center ;) social view of the world, I've found my brief time on here helpful.
When you personalize a debate it's no longer a debate, it's a shouting match and it's a matter of which side can drown out the other; right vs wrong, fact vs fiction become irrelevant and learning opportunities are squandered.
For any who would counter that diametrically opposed parties are unlikely to change one another's views I'd offer that you're missing the point completely; you articulate in a fact-based, dispassionate manner YOUR views for all those "on the fence"; that's the crowd that's still persuadable and the one most likely to change a position when the debate is reasoned and well posited.
Grey Ghost's Link
I couldn't agree more with you on this topic....even though there is no actual evidence that Socrates ever said your original quote.
You might be right but you'll have to take that up with Plato.
Maybe that's why the book was only a buck.
Grey Ghost's Link
Hey, a good quote is a good quote, whoever came up with it.
It was asked earlier if Socrates was a liberal. I found that question interesting, so I Googled up this link. It's purely philosophical conjecture, and most here won't read it all, but I think you and a few others may enjoy it.