You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: When Discussing Ideas, is One Writing Style Superior to Another?

in Ask the Hive3 years ago

I love it, this is precisely the type of feedback I was hoping for!

To answer your pedantic side, I am, of course, referring to the extreme personality disorders when I use the term "narcissism" and its derivatives; your presumption is entirely justified. I like to think that I know what I'm talking about, given that the second excerpt is actually from a work-in-progress about narcissism itself, one in which I discuss just how pervasive and dangerous it can be, providing some personal examples of various degrees I have encountered (all while omitting names to protect the innocent, despite the fact that there is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt). Of course, I am no expert on the subject, and everything else I have to say could be completely wrong. Much of what I have to say is based on observations that I have made firsthand, but who is to say that I am able to properly interpret the happenings around me? Am I not just as susceptible to bias as everyone else?

To answer your serious side, I actually began writing my own little instruction manual on how to deal with ideologues shortly before I began reading through your work. It seems that we have remarkably similar approaches, right down to deliberately making errors that our ideological opponents will inevitably fixate upon. I like to have fun with it, since some people are little more than trolls. The trick, I've found, is learning to distinguish those who have merely been misled and have developed a habit of parroting flawed talking points from those who have a vested interest in shielding their ideas from criticism. In other words, one must know the difference between the merely ignorant and the intellectually dishonest.

Sort:  

The trick, I've found, is learning to distinguish those who have merely been misled and have developed a habit of parroting flawed talking points from those who have a vested interest in shielding their ideas from criticism. In other words, one must know the difference between the merely ignorant and the intellectually dishonest.

Schoolboy error! - tar them all with the same brush, it makes for a much happier blogger.

...you might enjoy the latest post I've just done...you'll get it...
https://peakd.com/hive-150329/@lucylin/you-cant-be-heard-screaming-in-space-but-farting-in-cyber-space-will-be-heard

Due to the very sycophantic nature of this reply, I'll upvote you!...lol.

Facepalm

Bloody hell, you're right! It's been almost a year since a last wrote a proper editorial, and all because I made the mistake of trying to be nuanced in my last long-winded rebuttal to a dumbass Trotskiist. Who am I kidding, nuance never solved a blasted thing, it doesn't work on people who think in black and white! After all, said Trotskiist I was arguing with said he had no intention of "wasting time reading" what I had to say!

I don't know why I even try being nice. It's never worked for me.

The inevitable (and painful) destination, of attempting to use logic and reason with people who posses neither...

head.gif

...and another upvote for continued sycophancy ! lololol

If only you could see the expression on my face or hear the tone of my voice. You have me laughing me arse off! Enough, I need to wake up early tomorrow.

I do webcamming services at a very reasonable rate...