Arguing with lunatics

From	Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	sci.physics
Subject	Arguing with lunatics
Date	2016-04-21 14:53 -0500
Organization	Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID	<nfbb45$325$1@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink)

Show all headers | View raw

There are a number of lunatics that post to this group. There are also a 
number of people that seem to spend a lot of time trying to reason with 
lunatics. Lunatics cannot be reasoned with; it's what makes them lunatics.

I think there may be a problem with perception. Maybe it's because the 
lunatic isn't babbling. He *sounds* reasonable, and so maybe the thought 
is that he's not actually a lunatic and can be reasoned with after all. 
No. Lunatics can form syntactically sensible sentences while at the same 
time being unable to reason.

There's also some confusion about the conviction of one's ideas. There 
are lots of people who are firmly convinced of what they say, and feel 
*therefore* that those convictions must have been arrived at reasonably. 
No. Convictions can come from reason, but they can also come from 
emotional disturbance or unjustified prejudices or some deep-seated 
psychological need. If you are convinced that something is true, but 
can't say WHY you are convinced it is true (other than "it seems 
logical" or "it's what comes easiest to my mind"), then chances are it 
is not based on reason or evidence. In fact, a lot of lunatics will 
state something is true DESPITE evidence to the contrary or DESPITE lack 
of evidence in support. Or they will say that their ideas are true 
because of the meaning of words, where they are relying on THEIR OWN 
meaning of those same words -- another sign of lunacy.

The lunatic may spout their ideas because:
- not spouting leads to breakdowns, so that spouting is a therapeutic outlet
- they are normally shunned and feel alone, and so speak to be heard
- they are megalomaniacs with savior complexes who feel that they are 
somehow special gifts to the world
- they want to associate with normal people to feel more normal, and 
engaging in conversation is a way to feel less odd
- they are just cackling jesters who enjoy being catcallers, gadflies, 
iconoclasts-for-the-cause-of-iconoclasm
- they suffer from debilitating inferiority complexes and cope with them 
by confronting their perceived persecutors


-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Arguing with lunatics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-21 14:53 -0500
  Re: Arguing with lunatics jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-21 20:11 +0000
    Re: Arguing with lunatics "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-21 16:27 -0500
      Re: Arguing with lunatics jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-21 21:37 +0000
        Re: Arguing with lunatics "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-22 12:58 -0500
          Re: Arguing with lunatics jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-22 20:56 +0000
            Re: Arguing with lunatics john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-04-22 14:45 -0700
              Re: Arguing with lunatics jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-22 22:46 +0000
                Re: Arguing with lunatics "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-25 13:07 -0500
                Re: Arguing with lunatics jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-25 18:35 +0000
                Re: Arguing with lunatics "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-25 15:25 -0500
                Re: Arguing with lunatics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-25 20:34 +0000
                Re: Arguing with lunatics "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-25 15:57 -0500
                Re: Arguing with lunatics jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-25 21:12 +0000
                Re: Arguing with lunatics "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-28 14:03 -0500
                Re: Arguing with lunatics jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-28 19:50 +0000
                Re: Arguing with lunatics "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-05-01 12:57 -0500
                Re: Arguing with lunatics jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-05-01 19:39 +0000
                Re: Arguing with lunatics "Bast" <fakename@nomail.invalid> - 2016-04-25 18:04 -0400
                Re: Arguing with lunatics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-25 17:23 -0500
                Re: Arguing with lunatics HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-25 16:50 -0700
                Re: Arguing with lunatics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-04-25 22:41 +0000
                Re: Arguing with lunatics jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-25 21:10 +0000
                Re: Arguing with lunatics "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-26 13:13 -0500
                Re: Arguing with lunatics jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-04-26 19:06 +0000
              Re: Arguing with lunatics ClutterFreak <clutterfreakincarnate@gmail.com> - 2016-04-22 18:08 -0700
                Re: Arguing with lunatics "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-25 15:29 -0500
                Re: Arguing with lunatics ClutterFreak <clutterfreakincarnate@gmail.com> - 2016-04-25 14:08 -0700
                Re: Arguing with lunatics "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-04-25 14:53 -0700
              Re: Arguing with lunatics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-04-23 08:33 -0500
                Re: Arguing with lunatics HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-23 06:41 -0700
                Re: Arguing with lunatics benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-23 12:58 -0400
                Re: Arguing with lunatics Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-04-23 12:33 -0500
                Re: Arguing with lunatics HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-04-23 10:56 -0700
                Re: Arguing with lunatics benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-23 23:29 -0400
                Re: Arguing with lunatics Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-04-23 22:42 -0500
                Re: Arguing with lunatics benj <nobodyxx@gmail> - 2016-04-24 00:36 -0400
                Re: Arguing with lunatics "Rocky" <wookiee@att.net> - 2016-04-25 13:10 -0500

csiph-web