I don't bother debating. Debate is not about finding the truth, it's about having the correct techniques of logic/illogic in order to "win".
If someone believes in something that I know is total bullshit and they're not interested in contrary information, there's no need to argue.
2 relevant quotes which give a view of why some people won't change their minds until they viscerally feel the need to change...
"And then there is the psychological effect of the Big Lie which is axiomatic in gaslighting. The paradox here is that the bigger the lie, the harder it is for the mind to bridge the gulf between perceived reality and the lie that authority figures are painting as truth. I believe that the prospect of being deceived evinces a primitive emotional response on a par with staring death in the face. We are hard-wired to fear deception because we have evolved to interpret it as an existential threat. That’s why deception can elicit the same emotional response as the miscalculation of a serious physical threat. Lies told to us don’t always bear the same cost as a misjudged red light, but the primitive part of the brain can’t make this distinction and we rely on cerebral mediation for a more appropriate but delayed response. And in the long run, the lie is often just as dangerous as the physical threat. Many government whoppers – ‘safe and effective’ – do cost lives.
To avoid the death-like experience of being deceived, a mental defence is erected to deny that the lie is happening."
"The evolutionary psychologist William von Hippel found that humans use large parts of thinking power to navigate social world rather than perform independent analysis and decision making. For most people it is the mechanism that, in case of doubt, will prevent one from thinking what is right if, in return, it endangers one’s social status. This phenomenon occurs more strongly the higher a person’s social status. Another factor is that the more educated and more theoretically intelligent a person is, the more their brain is adept at selling them the biggest nonsense as a reasonable idea, as long as it elevates their social status. The upper educated class tends to be more inclined than ordinary people to chase some intellectual boondoggle. "
Isn't that what you're doing now? Debating, I mean. You're presenting a different thesis that arguing is never worth it. And here's another technique I should have added as 2B: find your common ground and places of agreement. To model that, Catherine Austin Fitts said "Most people would rather die than admit they've been a patsy." So it's someone admitting they've been deceived rather than being deceived that's the near-death experience, especially when it's potentially fatal and they can't take it back.
And I agree that it's easier to get away with a big lie than a small one, which was one of the rules in my propaganda playbook YT: https://youtu.be/X__TdauN95M.
I'm going to try to model this method with some of my topics coming up. Glad to have you responding!
There's so much good stuff here that I'm trying hard not to hijack the thread, but I simply cannot resist complimenting you on that. Your plays on words are always delightful, but that one is in a class of its own!
PS My own dear mother used to tell ol pops that he should never argue with his wife, he should just dicker. Then they'd both roar, like I'm doing now. I plead innocence of the outcome!
Omg, Goeff! That was hilarious. I'm going to use that on my husband. His name is Richard, but he goes by Dick. LOL! And guess what my name, Rhonda, also spells. (gonna be a bit lewd, so kind of sorry:) Rhonda = Hard On. This Universe loves its jokes:)
I'm just as passionate about having fun, esp. in a no-filter embarrass my children kind of way, as I am about waking up the world to how they've been duped, like I was. I just wish I could be as eloquent and skillful as you are, in doing so. Oh, and too funny about Go-eff's name. I surprisingly did not notice that.
Are you kidding me about "Rhonda?" Even tho I've been ecstatically married for decades, I still get one of those you mentioned for the cutest lil co-worker I had untold years ago and her name was "Rhonda." Had she not been married, I'da snatched her up in a heartbeat.
Hey, perhaps we should take this discussion eleswhere? Happy New Year to both you and Dick! : )
Happy New Year to you both, as well. And thank you for the Welsh meaning and for the good laugh last night. My maternal side is Dutch and Welsh and paternal is Scottish. And also, I'm a Scorpio, so the lance can be striking and stinging at times, esp. if anyone is harming or abusing another.
Tereza showed your name as Go Eff, as well, and I surprisingly hadn't noticed that. Too funny!
Yeah, most people think it's a misspelling but it ain't. I am thinking of changing it to "Cloacina." : )
Me dear mudder is now gone, but I die laughing every time I think of her and some of the stuff she came up with, and how she'd giggle about it and how I now guffaw over it. Pops had a sense of humor too and I have no doubt she and he have 'ol San Pedro and the Big Man hisself constantly in stitches.
Cloacina went over my head, unless you're referencing it as the new Cain Cola that will make you a murderer and a liar:) Sounds like you had a fun childhood.
Cloacina is the Roman goddess of the sewers. Since I'm a boy, I should say "Cloaca," but that would be too obvious, and I don't think Cloacina had a male counterpart, so hence my ambivalence and hesitation about that.
Yeah, my whole life has been pretty much non stop fun except for the utterly excruciating pain (torture, really) of sitting in the pew on Sundays listening to endless streams of confusing gobbledy gook (Since this is a respectable site, I'm trying to exercise a bit of gentility, if ya know what I mean). I don't know how we endured sitting there for hours at a time, but we made it and it did teach us a modicum of dicipline. And fortunately I married a woman possessed of rather prominent amounts of rascality...
We always worked like the divil, but we made, and still do, fun outta that, too.
I agree that our culture has dissuaded us from debate in favor of playing nice. But I think there's more to it - when I disagree with friends I notice more and more a kind of glazing over thing happen. Like they don't know what do with it. Or, an annoyed look and then quick changing of the topic. We've been conditioned to group think, especially post covid-op.
That said in the substack world, debate is more likely so your primer on how to argue well is helpful.
I will def keep an eye on your stack for instructive lessons. :-)
You're so right, Kathleen. If there's more than one person, a conspiratorial glance passes between them, although it's more an anti-conspiratorial glance. I recognize when I hear my daughters' voices change. There's a hard edge that comes into them. Sometimes there's even the barely suppressed eye roll. But the glazing over really captures it. It's a "there she goes again, pull the veil quick. I'm already bored."
Sigh. Yer right, it's only on substack that we have a chance of trying this out.
"Sometimes there's even the barely suppressed eye roll. But the glazing over really captures it. It's a "there she goes again, pull the veil quick. I'm already bored."
Great article, great insights Tereza – shared privately. I will just re-emphasise my own top highlight:
“7:54 – No. 7: What Counts as an Authority?
[…]
9:32 “… and then I think we need to look at outside authorities and their credibility. My scale for people like journalists is that I look at what do they risk, what do they lose by what it is that they've said and what do they stand to gain by it - whether that's in money, in reputation, in career advancement … “
[...]
10:00 “… and if I've found one thing that is intentionally untrue - something that has been corrected for instance but they still continue with it, then I have to dismiss everything that they're saying as an authority. if someone is mistaken - if I just disagree with them, that's completely different but if I know that they have lied then they are no longer an authority.”
End of quoted passage.
I wish I could find a video that I watched around 18 months ago – generally about mass psychosis I recall (in the context of the Covidean Cult) – where it was stated that that those most informed on a particular topic can also the best liars – because they know exactly how to obfuscate without being detected. I can barely count the number of commentators who, in my naivety, I trusted and admired implicitly only to have that trust shattered.
I won’t name names at the micro-level, but the BBC generally comes to mind. I listened to the BBC religiously through 911, and the wars on terror in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya. It was only during the ‘situation’ in Syria in late 2015 that I suddenly realised that the BBC (and ALL ’mainstream’ players) were no longer an authority.
It both shocks me and gives me hope that you've gone from a BBC watcher to one of the deepest divers in conspiracy waters in eight years. In 2015 I was still watching Democracy Now religiously. It's been quite a ride.
I wonder if the best liars are those lying to themselves, or those who know they're lying.
Thanks for quoting me here. This is the kind of systematic thing you and I love, putting all the same color in neat little stacks. It doesn't appeal to everyone but systematic thinkers are certainly over-represented in our corner of Substack.
SS “is” the new Democracy Now. It’s just not supported by the corporation of public broadcasting (ie: government influences). I too was a big supporter of Amy, but she definitely lost me during Covid (I believe Judy and Gwyn had sold out by then as well). I think her partner was a “bought” Dr. so she joined in the kool-aid drinking party. Happier now by a mile over here. Thx for all you do.
Very helpful list. Something I need to work on too! 🤣🤣🤣😄😎
The last few years has been interesting regarding the "rules of engagement" Developing a way to not appear to attack a position held too harshly for the person you want to maintain a friendship with.
(Across a wide array of topics.... the divide n rule topics being thrown at us, IMHO.)
Thanks for including....sometimes I have too many Substacks I should be reading... that's my fault!
Agreed! I've come to keep my online debates and my personal convos very separate. In person, my m.o. is compliments, questions, compliments. Debate with blue martinis and foot massage is more aspirational than something I can imagine. But maybe, putting it out into the universe ...
Keep planting those seeds, one at a time, and soon something will eventually grow. Or I also like to imagine that our thoughts are electrons traveling via an invisible copper wire, where eventually a light, or two or three, will eventually turn on, within the minds of others. We're all plugged in:)
I love how you make me think deeper about presenting and discussing issues, so thank you for teaching me some new ways of communicating, as unfortunately, that's my biggest downfall. I also need to learn how to set my emotions aside, as this awakening process has been extremely alarming and disconcerting.
I only wish they would teach psychology and communication skills from elementary school and onwards, since looking back at my childhood it would have made a world of difference in how I maneuvered and understood the world, and its effects on me and me on it. You would have been a great mother to have, so your daughters are very lucky:)
Yes! The Greek education was the Trivium: grammar, which was the relationships between things, rhetoric, the ability to speak clearly, and logic/ dialectic, the ability to think. This was taught to the ruling class of course, but the word teacher actually means tutor, who were the slaves that gave individual instruction, making them better at what they taught than the students!
Haha, I won't tell my daughters you said that but I hope it's true. At the moment my oldest is worried about our relationship because I won't acknowledge that cis-gendered need to label themselves (this is the married one who's been with her now-husband for 11 years), the middle keeps her friends far away from me so I won't embarrass her, and the youngest is a contrarian who loves to argue with everything I say. But life is long and there are turnarounds I never expected, so I just watch and wait, and am glad to have you all to talk to.
Interesting about the Greek education and its breakdown. In the case of decoding words and the relationships between things, the decoded words must always be in context or relation to the backstory from where the original coded word was applied, otherwise it's nonsensical/illogical. Then the ability to convey these findings is where many fail, esp. myself, as, for me, there is too much to explain with the relational story, and then prove it over and over, as if it were a chemistry lab experiment, in order to help others see it. With you, however, it's much easier b/c you immediately know the backstory, and its relations. The ability/Abel-ity to think is the main problem, however, and I relate it to Abel, as I feel his death more represents the killing of thinking for himself. The reason: Tabernacle = Abel Trance. Teacher = Cheater, even though the teachers aren't aware of the religious rite/right/write "spells" they invoke within our subconscious.
Sword = Words, and the latter is the most piercing of all. Interestingly, Jesus was alleged to say this in Rev. 2:16 Repent; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will fight against them with the sword of my mouth.
Mary Magdalene = Anagram Medley, which 'medley,' from the rare, archaic sense, means battle, combat, fighting.
Anyway, surprised I brought up codes? Lol! I can't help myself. As for your daughters, our children are interesting, aren't they. I view mine as part of my soul walking outside of myself. They've taught me to better understand my husband, myself, and how I interact with others. It's a battle, however, on some fronts. My eldest son is the argumentative one, like myself, yet he does make me think deeper, whereas my daughter is on the same wavelength, and if I didn't have her, well I don't know what I'd do. Probably just shut up. Don't tell her that:)
I've got different ones for different wavelengths. Tonight the argumentative one just gave me some valuable advice I'll be posting later. The oldest is my touchstone but it's the youngest that makes me think deeper, kinda like yours.
In the video I left it at "Don't argue with anyone you don't like," but then realized I love a good no-holds-barred cage fight. I generally give three chances to have a civilized debate but if they keep coming back with arrogance, what can I do? I realize we're both saying 'they' but do you get this response from mostly women or men? A few times it's been a woman but almost always, a man.
So far for me it's 100% male, arrogance wise, as far as I can tell. Women can be hard headed and stinging, but the guys tend to do the puff 'n strut. For the gals I have fun letting 'em get nasty to no avail while for the males I get a kick outta makin' the feathers fly; I just can't help it.
Lots of thought-provoking ideas here. But I'm really struggling with this one: "But I’ve realized that the only people I can learn from are those who think they have something to learn from me." I've learned a lot from people who don't know me or who died before I was born.
Oh certainly. But I'm not in arguments with them! There's always the possibility that, had I been able to hold a conversation with Ben Franklin or Einstein, they would have liked my ideas ;-) I also do learn useful facts from people who think of themselves as superior to me. It's helpful to see how the other side gets to their positions.
But as Thich Nhat Hahn said (I was trying not to quote from an authority but can't help it) in a true dialogue, both sides are willing to change. If someone is only talking to me in order to proselytize, like EV Jack, then I give myself permission not to change my mind because it's not an honest dialogue.
What I’d like to see is a debate between Jews and gentiles. A real open honest debate with questions like: why do you hate gentiles? Why are we considered goy, cattle, animals? Don’t ask “do you hate” because they’re just going to lie lie lie through their teeth. Those would be some of my opening questions for starts.
Would you say this about Jews you know personally? The ones I know are very nice people. I think they've been as deceived about what their scriptures say as anyone. They've been taught from birth that they're the victims, they need a homeland and have to band together for self-protection. We agree completely that the scriptures are hate speech, but that goes for the OT, which is an anti-Canaanite polemic, and the NT, which is an anti-Jew polemic. There's a reason that pograms always followed Good Friday. The Jews are presented as a bloodthirsty mob calling for the death of the savior! I think that both psyops need to be examined together.
That's a great question. Actually I don't know of any in my personal circle, maybe just one - and he's a great guy. Like they say in the movies/tv shows: It's complicated. Some I've known in the workplace were really rude, arrogant, screamers and quick to insult me (that didn't help in formulating my opinions). Sure, they've been inculcated to be on the defensive, and what's advantageous to them is how they're raised and what they learn in the synagogues. It's definitely all about Them, and as for the rest of us humans? Meh? We could take some lessons from this, but the rest of us humans are too divided in class/intelligence/culture/background/politics/religion/ethnicity to ever come together on anything, not even being American.
Judaeo-Christinsanity is one of the biggest train wreck psyops that ever befell Humanity. The morality is completely diametrically opposed, contradictory. Here in the OT, you have the psychopathic warlord Yahweh (and other Elohim) ordering around the poor Jewish people, commanding them to destroy entire cities, villages, scorched earth policy, (it's all hinted at in Mauro Biglino's The Naked Bible). Then you have the NT with Jesus talking about the Father in heaven, that the kingdom of heaven is w/in you, that you are gods and will do greater things than me (and yes, there's the anti-Jew Synagogue of Satan stuff). But wasn't Jesus Jewish or not? If so, it sounds like he was rebelling against his own people? Oh, there's some nasty stuff about Jesus in the Talmud, about him being boiled in feces, stuff like that. It's pretty vicious. So yeah, it's pretty effed up on both sides of this religious playing field. And we didn't even touch on Islam! That's a whole other discussion. Yes, BOTH psyops need closer inspection in a clear rational way. Sorry for rambling on about this, but I could go for days on these topics.
Perhaps a debate between Jews and gentiles about Talmudarians/Zionism/ists would be illuminating? As with Christians, there are so many "Jewish" points of view.
I don't bother debating. Debate is not about finding the truth, it's about having the correct techniques of logic/illogic in order to "win".
If someone believes in something that I know is total bullshit and they're not interested in contrary information, there's no need to argue.
2 relevant quotes which give a view of why some people won't change their minds until they viscerally feel the need to change...
"And then there is the psychological effect of the Big Lie which is axiomatic in gaslighting. The paradox here is that the bigger the lie, the harder it is for the mind to bridge the gulf between perceived reality and the lie that authority figures are painting as truth. I believe that the prospect of being deceived evinces a primitive emotional response on a par with staring death in the face. We are hard-wired to fear deception because we have evolved to interpret it as an existential threat. That’s why deception can elicit the same emotional response as the miscalculation of a serious physical threat. Lies told to us don’t always bear the same cost as a misjudged red light, but the primitive part of the brain can’t make this distinction and we rely on cerebral mediation for a more appropriate but delayed response. And in the long run, the lie is often just as dangerous as the physical threat. Many government whoppers – ‘safe and effective’ – do cost lives.
To avoid the death-like experience of being deceived, a mental defence is erected to deny that the lie is happening."
(From https://leftlockdownsceptics.com/alleged-cia-involvement-in-jfk-assassination-goes-mainstream-so-now-what/ )
------
"The evolutionary psychologist William von Hippel found that humans use large parts of thinking power to navigate social world rather than perform independent analysis and decision making. For most people it is the mechanism that, in case of doubt, will prevent one from thinking what is right if, in return, it endangers one’s social status. This phenomenon occurs more strongly the higher a person’s social status. Another factor is that the more educated and more theoretically intelligent a person is, the more their brain is adept at selling them the biggest nonsense as a reasonable idea, as long as it elevates their social status. The upper educated class tends to be more inclined than ordinary people to chase some intellectual boondoggle. "
-Sasha Latypova
Isn't that what you're doing now? Debating, I mean. You're presenting a different thesis that arguing is never worth it. And here's another technique I should have added as 2B: find your common ground and places of agreement. To model that, Catherine Austin Fitts said "Most people would rather die than admit they've been a patsy." So it's someone admitting they've been deceived rather than being deceived that's the near-death experience, especially when it's potentially fatal and they can't take it back.
And I agree that it's easier to get away with a big lie than a small one, which was one of the rules in my propaganda playbook YT: https://youtu.be/X__TdauN95M.
I'm going to try to model this method with some of my topics coming up. Glad to have you responding!
"... and what I call rhetorical devisives."
There's so much good stuff here that I'm trying hard not to hijack the thread, but I simply cannot resist complimenting you on that. Your plays on words are always delightful, but that one is in a class of its own!
PS My own dear mother used to tell ol pops that he should never argue with his wife, he should just dicker. Then they'd both roar, like I'm doing now. I plead innocence of the outcome!
I can see that apple didn't fall far from the tree!
Anytime you want to hijack my thread with compliments, steal away ;-)
You think it was an apple tree?
Nuts!
Omg, Goeff! That was hilarious. I'm going to use that on my husband. His name is Richard, but he goes by Dick. LOL! And guess what my name, Rhonda, also spells. (gonna be a bit lewd, so kind of sorry:) Rhonda = Hard On. This Universe loves its jokes:)
I'm glad to see you also have fun with your wordplay, Rhonda, and it's not just an obsession with revealing evil plots to rule the world!
And glad Goeff could weigh in. We'll keep it between ourselves that his chosen spelling is Go Eff!
I'm just as passionate about having fun, esp. in a no-filter embarrass my children kind of way, as I am about waking up the world to how they've been duped, like I was. I just wish I could be as eloquent and skillful as you are, in doing so. Oh, and too funny about Go-eff's name. I surprisingly did not notice that.
It not only spells, Hard on, but it means,
It is of Welsh origin, and the meaning of Rhonda is "good lance".
Glad you liked it!
Are you kidding me about "Rhonda?" Even tho I've been ecstatically married for decades, I still get one of those you mentioned for the cutest lil co-worker I had untold years ago and her name was "Rhonda." Had she not been married, I'da snatched her up in a heartbeat.
Hey, perhaps we should take this discussion eleswhere? Happy New Year to both you and Dick! : )
Happy New Year to you both, as well. And thank you for the Welsh meaning and for the good laugh last night. My maternal side is Dutch and Welsh and paternal is Scottish. And also, I'm a Scorpio, so the lance can be striking and stinging at times, esp. if anyone is harming or abusing another.
Tereza showed your name as Go Eff, as well, and I surprisingly hadn't noticed that. Too funny!
Yeah, most people think it's a misspelling but it ain't. I am thinking of changing it to "Cloacina." : )
Me dear mudder is now gone, but I die laughing every time I think of her and some of the stuff she came up with, and how she'd giggle about it and how I now guffaw over it. Pops had a sense of humor too and I have no doubt she and he have 'ol San Pedro and the Big Man hisself constantly in stitches.
Bless you!
I didn't notice until the Rhondesvous that I'd been misspelling it every time. No relation, then, to the friendly giraffe!
I used to always want to change my middle name to Vous:)
Not a problem at all. Most people do that.
Spell it as you wish, it's your SS after all! : )
Cloacina went over my head, unless you're referencing it as the new Cain Cola that will make you a murderer and a liar:) Sounds like you had a fun childhood.
Cloacina is the Roman goddess of the sewers. Since I'm a boy, I should say "Cloaca," but that would be too obvious, and I don't think Cloacina had a male counterpart, so hence my ambivalence and hesitation about that.
Yeah, my whole life has been pretty much non stop fun except for the utterly excruciating pain (torture, really) of sitting in the pew on Sundays listening to endless streams of confusing gobbledy gook (Since this is a respectable site, I'm trying to exercise a bit of gentility, if ya know what I mean). I don't know how we endured sitting there for hours at a time, but we made it and it did teach us a modicum of dicipline. And fortunately I married a woman possessed of rather prominent amounts of rascality...
We always worked like the divil, but we made, and still do, fun outta that, too.
I agree that our culture has dissuaded us from debate in favor of playing nice. But I think there's more to it - when I disagree with friends I notice more and more a kind of glazing over thing happen. Like they don't know what do with it. Or, an annoyed look and then quick changing of the topic. We've been conditioned to group think, especially post covid-op.
That said in the substack world, debate is more likely so your primer on how to argue well is helpful.
I will def keep an eye on your stack for instructive lessons. :-)
You're so right, Kathleen. If there's more than one person, a conspiratorial glance passes between them, although it's more an anti-conspiratorial glance. I recognize when I hear my daughters' voices change. There's a hard edge that comes into them. Sometimes there's even the barely suppressed eye roll. But the glazing over really captures it. It's a "there she goes again, pull the veil quick. I'm already bored."
Sigh. Yer right, it's only on substack that we have a chance of trying this out.
"Sometimes there's even the barely suppressed eye roll. But the glazing over really captures it. It's a "there she goes again, pull the veil quick. I'm already bored."
Well said - I know that moment too well.
Me too very familiar with it 🙄
Great article, great insights Tereza – shared privately. I will just re-emphasise my own top highlight:
“7:54 – No. 7: What Counts as an Authority?
[…]
9:32 “… and then I think we need to look at outside authorities and their credibility. My scale for people like journalists is that I look at what do they risk, what do they lose by what it is that they've said and what do they stand to gain by it - whether that's in money, in reputation, in career advancement … “
[...]
10:00 “… and if I've found one thing that is intentionally untrue - something that has been corrected for instance but they still continue with it, then I have to dismiss everything that they're saying as an authority. if someone is mistaken - if I just disagree with them, that's completely different but if I know that they have lied then they are no longer an authority.”
End of quoted passage.
I wish I could find a video that I watched around 18 months ago – generally about mass psychosis I recall (in the context of the Covidean Cult) – where it was stated that that those most informed on a particular topic can also the best liars – because they know exactly how to obfuscate without being detected. I can barely count the number of commentators who, in my naivety, I trusted and admired implicitly only to have that trust shattered.
I won’t name names at the micro-level, but the BBC generally comes to mind. I listened to the BBC religiously through 911, and the wars on terror in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya. It was only during the ‘situation’ in Syria in late 2015 that I suddenly realised that the BBC (and ALL ’mainstream’ players) were no longer an authority.
It both shocks me and gives me hope that you've gone from a BBC watcher to one of the deepest divers in conspiracy waters in eight years. In 2015 I was still watching Democracy Now religiously. It's been quite a ride.
I wonder if the best liars are those lying to themselves, or those who know they're lying.
Thanks for quoting me here. This is the kind of systematic thing you and I love, putting all the same color in neat little stacks. It doesn't appeal to everyone but systematic thinkers are certainly over-represented in our corner of Substack.
SS “is” the new Democracy Now. It’s just not supported by the corporation of public broadcasting (ie: government influences). I too was a big supporter of Amy, but she definitely lost me during Covid (I believe Judy and Gwyn had sold out by then as well). I think her partner was a “bought” Dr. so she joined in the kool-aid drinking party. Happier now by a mile over here. Thx for all you do.
Very helpful list. Something I need to work on too! 🤣🤣🤣😄😎
The last few years has been interesting regarding the "rules of engagement" Developing a way to not appear to attack a position held too harshly for the person you want to maintain a friendship with.
(Across a wide array of topics.... the divide n rule topics being thrown at us, IMHO.)
Thanks for including....sometimes I have too many Substacks I should be reading... that's my fault!
Agreed! I've come to keep my online debates and my personal convos very separate. In person, my m.o. is compliments, questions, compliments. Debate with blue martinis and foot massage is more aspirational than something I can imagine. But maybe, putting it out into the universe ...
Book club night helps my little clique.
Appreciate your wide array of thoughts and postings.
Keep planting those seeds, one at a time, and soon something will eventually grow. Or I also like to imagine that our thoughts are electrons traveling via an invisible copper wire, where eventually a light, or two or three, will eventually turn on, within the minds of others. We're all plugged in:)
We really needed this - this year will be full of...uh...sh...uh...debate, that is for sure...great post...great minds...thanks for the Drop in...
I'm kicking myself for not stealing some memes before I posted. I'm going to edit in a couple now.
steal away...
Excellent. Thank you, Tereza.
Only YOU can prevent emotional dumpster fires...
Thanks for the mental images this created, I laughed pretty loud at this.
So glad that was enjoyed. I'm still chuckling now thinking about it.
I love how you make me think deeper about presenting and discussing issues, so thank you for teaching me some new ways of communicating, as unfortunately, that's my biggest downfall. I also need to learn how to set my emotions aside, as this awakening process has been extremely alarming and disconcerting.
I only wish they would teach psychology and communication skills from elementary school and onwards, since looking back at my childhood it would have made a world of difference in how I maneuvered and understood the world, and its effects on me and me on it. You would have been a great mother to have, so your daughters are very lucky:)
Yes! The Greek education was the Trivium: grammar, which was the relationships between things, rhetoric, the ability to speak clearly, and logic/ dialectic, the ability to think. This was taught to the ruling class of course, but the word teacher actually means tutor, who were the slaves that gave individual instruction, making them better at what they taught than the students!
Haha, I won't tell my daughters you said that but I hope it's true. At the moment my oldest is worried about our relationship because I won't acknowledge that cis-gendered need to label themselves (this is the married one who's been with her now-husband for 11 years), the middle keeps her friends far away from me so I won't embarrass her, and the youngest is a contrarian who loves to argue with everything I say. But life is long and there are turnarounds I never expected, so I just watch and wait, and am glad to have you all to talk to.
Interesting about the Greek education and its breakdown. In the case of decoding words and the relationships between things, the decoded words must always be in context or relation to the backstory from where the original coded word was applied, otherwise it's nonsensical/illogical. Then the ability to convey these findings is where many fail, esp. myself, as, for me, there is too much to explain with the relational story, and then prove it over and over, as if it were a chemistry lab experiment, in order to help others see it. With you, however, it's much easier b/c you immediately know the backstory, and its relations. The ability/Abel-ity to think is the main problem, however, and I relate it to Abel, as I feel his death more represents the killing of thinking for himself. The reason: Tabernacle = Abel Trance. Teacher = Cheater, even though the teachers aren't aware of the religious rite/right/write "spells" they invoke within our subconscious.
Sword = Words, and the latter is the most piercing of all. Interestingly, Jesus was alleged to say this in Rev. 2:16 Repent; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will fight against them with the sword of my mouth.
Mary Magdalene = Anagram Medley, which 'medley,' from the rare, archaic sense, means battle, combat, fighting.
Anyway, surprised I brought up codes? Lol! I can't help myself. As for your daughters, our children are interesting, aren't they. I view mine as part of my soul walking outside of myself. They've taught me to better understand my husband, myself, and how I interact with others. It's a battle, however, on some fronts. My eldest son is the argumentative one, like myself, yet he does make me think deeper, whereas my daughter is on the same wavelength, and if I didn't have her, well I don't know what I'd do. Probably just shut up. Don't tell her that:)
I've got different ones for different wavelengths. Tonight the argumentative one just gave me some valuable advice I'll be posting later. The oldest is my touchstone but it's the youngest that makes me think deeper, kinda like yours.
Another nourishing nosebag for us all to munch on, Tereza. Thank you.
Hahaha!
I had to pause right here and comment.
Dis be me, sometimes....too funny!
"... unless they’re full of themselves and it gives you a foil to make your arguments to a wider audience."
Plus it can be fun making the type squirm or better yet, throw down their toys and stomp away. Blahhhh!!!!
In the video I left it at "Don't argue with anyone you don't like," but then realized I love a good no-holds-barred cage fight. I generally give three chances to have a civilized debate but if they keep coming back with arrogance, what can I do? I realize we're both saying 'they' but do you get this response from mostly women or men? A few times it's been a woman but almost always, a man.
So far for me it's 100% male, arrogance wise, as far as I can tell. Women can be hard headed and stinging, but the guys tend to do the puff 'n strut. For the gals I have fun letting 'em get nasty to no avail while for the males I get a kick outta makin' the feathers fly; I just can't help it.
Other than that I'm pretty innocent! Hee heee!
Lots of thought-provoking ideas here. But I'm really struggling with this one: "But I’ve realized that the only people I can learn from are those who think they have something to learn from me." I've learned a lot from people who don't know me or who died before I was born.
Oh certainly. But I'm not in arguments with them! There's always the possibility that, had I been able to hold a conversation with Ben Franklin or Einstein, they would have liked my ideas ;-) I also do learn useful facts from people who think of themselves as superior to me. It's helpful to see how the other side gets to their positions.
But as Thich Nhat Hahn said (I was trying not to quote from an authority but can't help it) in a true dialogue, both sides are willing to change. If someone is only talking to me in order to proselytize, like EV Jack, then I give myself permission not to change my mind because it's not an honest dialogue.
What I’d like to see is a debate between Jews and gentiles. A real open honest debate with questions like: why do you hate gentiles? Why are we considered goy, cattle, animals? Don’t ask “do you hate” because they’re just going to lie lie lie through their teeth. Those would be some of my opening questions for starts.
Would you say this about Jews you know personally? The ones I know are very nice people. I think they've been as deceived about what their scriptures say as anyone. They've been taught from birth that they're the victims, they need a homeland and have to band together for self-protection. We agree completely that the scriptures are hate speech, but that goes for the OT, which is an anti-Canaanite polemic, and the NT, which is an anti-Jew polemic. There's a reason that pograms always followed Good Friday. The Jews are presented as a bloodthirsty mob calling for the death of the savior! I think that both psyops need to be examined together.
That's a great question. Actually I don't know of any in my personal circle, maybe just one - and he's a great guy. Like they say in the movies/tv shows: It's complicated. Some I've known in the workplace were really rude, arrogant, screamers and quick to insult me (that didn't help in formulating my opinions). Sure, they've been inculcated to be on the defensive, and what's advantageous to them is how they're raised and what they learn in the synagogues. It's definitely all about Them, and as for the rest of us humans? Meh? We could take some lessons from this, but the rest of us humans are too divided in class/intelligence/culture/background/politics/religion/ethnicity to ever come together on anything, not even being American.
Judaeo-Christinsanity is one of the biggest train wreck psyops that ever befell Humanity. The morality is completely diametrically opposed, contradictory. Here in the OT, you have the psychopathic warlord Yahweh (and other Elohim) ordering around the poor Jewish people, commanding them to destroy entire cities, villages, scorched earth policy, (it's all hinted at in Mauro Biglino's The Naked Bible). Then you have the NT with Jesus talking about the Father in heaven, that the kingdom of heaven is w/in you, that you are gods and will do greater things than me (and yes, there's the anti-Jew Synagogue of Satan stuff). But wasn't Jesus Jewish or not? If so, it sounds like he was rebelling against his own people? Oh, there's some nasty stuff about Jesus in the Talmud, about him being boiled in feces, stuff like that. It's pretty vicious. So yeah, it's pretty effed up on both sides of this religious playing field. And we didn't even touch on Islam! That's a whole other discussion. Yes, BOTH psyops need closer inspection in a clear rational way. Sorry for rambling on about this, but I could go for days on these topics.
You're preaching to the subversive Bible study choir! We'll start our closer inspection in a clear rational way next week ;-)
Oh this should be good. Can’t wait!
Perhaps a debate between Jews and gentiles about Talmudarians/Zionism/ists would be illuminating? As with Christians, there are so many "Jewish" points of view.
I found this topical
• Alex Jones and Brother Nathanael
https://goyimtv.com/v/1049778002/FULL--Alex-and-Brother-Nathanael
and I was prompted (triggered) to share this ...
• The Real Nazis (Extended) – Flood
https://goyimtv.com/v/2202773272/The-Real-Nazis--Extended-
Thanks Julius, I started on the second but I'll watch both soon.