|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Jul 25, 2018 13:45:10 GMT
As I've posted before, there is research that suggests that religious people lag behind non-religious people when it comes to empathy. no there isn’t Post it and I will show you the flaw. It’s very similar to the goofy stuff goz is saying.
|
|
|
Post by rachelcarson1953 on Jul 25, 2018 15:07:45 GMT
Empathy is definitely a trait encouraged by Christians. It's just not what you claim it to be. It bis not a mandate to do as the other person wishes. Otherwise, empathy would require you to help out when a person;s religious freedoms are in jeopardy or to help find a way to keep a child if a woman wants to do so. You're just projecting your view to things that interest you and ignoring it when it's something you are opposed to. Not at all, and in fact I think it is exactly the opposite. Christians cultivate 'conditional empathy' to only support those whose views which are in accord with their religion. You just said as much yourself! I agree with the bolded copy above. I would also say the you can plug in any religion, political party or other group and the statement would still be true. It's called 'tribalism'. Now, for accurate definitions: the link to the site is at the bottom of the post. So, the simple version: And the complicated version: It is difficult to have a debate when people have varying definitions of the subjects involved.
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Jul 25, 2018 15:48:39 GMT
Not at all, and in fact I think it is exactly the opposite. Christians cultivate 'conditional empathy' to only support those whose views which are in accord with their religion. You just said as much yourself! I agree with the bolded copy above. I would also say the you can plug in any religion, political party or other group and the statement would still be true. It's called 'tribalism'. Now, for accurate definitions: the link to the site is at the bottom of the post. So, the simple version: And the complicated version: It is difficult to have a debate when people have varying definitions of the subjects involved. None if this any way disputed what I said. The rrror is in thinking that putting oneself in someone else’s shoes means doing things as they would no matter what. That is not empathy.
|
|
|
Post by SciFive on Jul 25, 2018 16:06:33 GMT
Yeah, I do not often see religions preaching about empathy even though certain religious figures might give very good messages regarding feeling empathy with others.
I understand empathy can be a very innate thing in certain individuals while some can learn through experience.
I do not want to judge others but I believe certain people such as Terrapin Station , 🌵 and kls have very little feelings of empathy. I am not saying that any of them are in any way worse human beings than you or me but I find them driven by their own beliefs and understanding than on trying to understand other people. I believe libertarians may have less empathy than average people but I could be wrong about this. I find it very fascinating because lower feelings of empathy can also mean lower conscience at least among the atheists so I believe people like Terrapin and Cactus enjoy life unhindered from what goes around them. Holy crap, WOW. Don't listen to this nonsense, KLS.
You're one of the nicest and most caring people in this forum system (and you're the one left-leaning person who I keep mentioning as being a good person). I'm not usually fond of left-leaning people.
I can't imagine why anyone would say these things about you but they're not true.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Jul 25, 2018 18:42:38 GMT
Don't listen to this nonsense, KLS.
You're one of the nicest and most caring people in this forum system (and you're the one left-leaning person who I keep mentioning as being a good person). I'm not usually fond of left-leaning people.
I can't imagine why anyone would say these things about you but they're not true.
Well, more than once you've accused me of hating Jews and not wanting them to live, none of which is true. I don't agree with Aj here, but maybe you're not the best one to call him out on what he said. BTW, life is still miserable here, but no boils and locusts yet, thank God.
|
|
|
Post by SciFive on Jul 25, 2018 18:44:18 GMT
kls, you're a good person!
|
|
|
Post by rachelcarson1953 on Jul 25, 2018 20:57:23 GMT
Not at all, and in fact I think it is exactly the opposite. Christians cultivate 'conditional empathy' to only support those whose views which are in accord with their religion. You just said as much yourself! I agree with the bolded copy above. I would also say the you can plug in any religion, political party or other group and the statement would still be true. It's called 'tribalism'. Now, for accurate definitions: the link to the site is at the bottom of the post. So, the simple version: And the complicated version: It is difficult to have a debate when people have varying definitions of the subjects involved. In retrospect, I wish I had looked up these definitions a few years back when a debate was raging on the old IMDb board about the television program "Criminal Minds". Some posters felt that, knowing a bad guy's tortured past, one could have sympathy or empathy for them and the bad acts they committed. Others posters felt that, regardless of the tortured past, the bad guy was still ultimately responsible for committing the bad acts and deserved no sympathy or empathy. To use these definitions, I would now say that a normal human might have sympathy for a bad guy's tortured past, but unless that other human had actually had a tortured past of his own, he would not be able to empathize with the bad guy. And despite the bad guy's tortured past, he was not to be treated lightly in the court system because of it. There were some pretty sick bad guys on that show, and to be certain, the people who had tortured them had a measure of responsibility, too, but the bad acts still had to be condemned, even though the bad guy had once been a victim. Not all victims became offenders. In the context of this thread, I don't think religion promotes true empathy except within their worldview. Perhaps sympathy for others, or pity for others, but ultimately, in my experience with religion in my childhood, the answer was to join our religion and then everything would be okay. There was nothing in there about seeing and feeling from the other person's point of view.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jul 25, 2018 21:15:04 GMT
Wow! That is the perfect example of Christian paternalism IMHO. You are saying here ( and I am presuming this relates to the pregnant lady and abortion example) that YOU know better than that woman about what is actually best for HER? Re politics since you mentioned it as an aside. IMHO socialist democracies are more empathetic than capitalist societies which automatically means that the benefit of the many overrides the benefit of the individual. Have you used this same argument yourself, "If you give an alcoholic $20 he'll only drink himself to death"? Not really. I believe in the basic human right for adults to make their own decisions in life and to be responsible for them. ( naturally there are a few exceptions with health and mental health issues) This ties in with my humanism and Buddhist philosophy and is therefore at odds with the paternalism of the churches in religion and the substitution of 'charity' (which is handed out at the discretion of others who are better off) for human rights in a socialist way where every human is inherently equal and deserves a share of the resources of a society.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jul 25, 2018 21:26:47 GMT
I agree with the bolded copy above. I would also say the you can plug in any religion, political party or other group and the statement would still be true. It's called 'tribalism'. Now, for accurate definitions: the link to the site is at the bottom of the post. So, the simple version: And the complicated version: It is difficult to have a debate when people have varying definitions of the subjects involved. None if this any way disputed what I said. The rrror is in thinking that putting oneself in someone else’s shoes means doing things as they would no matter what. That is not empathy. Ahah! Here is where you are missing the point, entirely. Religion has this conditional empathy, and what you said is just another example. You are saying it again in another way. If you put yourself in someone's shoes, you allow THEM to make the decision of what is right FOR THEM in any given circumstances. You respect THEIR opinion and don't put your own above theirs, EVEN if your religious principles make you believe that you are 'right'. You do not JUDGE them and you do not attempt to change their mind to your religious or other version. You cannot have true empathy unless you do this and do not judge, nor prosthelytise and think that you know better because of something that YOU believe. The example of abortion is a very good one in this regard, butt it is true in every circumstance of having true empathy for someone else in their plight, in their individual lives. It is basically a respect for others and their inherent right to choose for themselves.
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Jul 25, 2018 21:50:59 GMT
Don't listen to this nonsense, KLS.
You're one of the nicest and most caring people in this forum system (and you're the one left-leaning person who I keep mentioning as being a good person). I'm not usually fond of left-leaning people.
I can't imagine why anyone would say these things about you but they're not true.
Well, more than once you've accused me of hating Jews and not wanting them to live, none of which is true. I don't agree with Aj here, but maybe you're not the best one to call him out on what he said. BTW, life is still miserable here, but no boils and locusts yet, thank God. I think I clarified that it was not meant that KLS doesn't have sympathy for others. That was for Cactus. Even KLS said that she tries very hard to understand others. So may be she is not able to express empathy very well. In any case I said the person is no worse than I or you and further clarified that she is nice person and has compassion.
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Jul 25, 2018 21:55:16 GMT
Have you used this same argument yourself, "If you give an alcoholic $20 he'll only drink himself to death"? 1 ... ... ... there are a few exceptions with health and mental health issues ... ... ... 2 ... ... ... every human is inherently equal and deserves a share of the resources of a society. 1 So you have used the same argument. 2 That's nice, but in the free world "society" doesn't have any resources, people (individually or in various groups) own the land. Government (just another sort of group) owns some land, but generally has some special use for it. There are two exceptions, fish in the ocean far off shore (closer to shore for citizens) and public use parks. I'm more charitable than that. I make much proper use of public parks so I suppose I owe someone for that. The problem with government in the United States giving handouts is that it has more debt than the people it's helping. Do the math, lady, that's not helping. It proves you're wrong though.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jul 25, 2018 22:03:01 GMT
1 ... ... ... there are a few exceptions with health and mental health issues ... ... ... 2 ... ... ... every human is inherently equal and deserves a share of the resources of a society. 1 So you have used the same argument. 2 That's nice, but in the free world "society" doesn't have any resources, people (individually or in various groups) own the land. Government (just another sort of group) owns some land, but generally has some special use for it. There are two exceptions, fish in the ocean far off shore (closer to shore for citizens) and public use parks. I'm more charitable than that. I make much proper use of public parks so I suppose I owe someone for that. The problem with government in the United States giving handouts is that it has more debt than the people it's helping. Do the math, lady, that's not helping. It proves you're wrong though. What total nonsense. In a social democracy the government raised taxes to fund public programmes, and they often own utilities and public land. The United States does not have a mandate on doing things the best way. Other democracies around the world do it way better. Your country is in a mess of its own making, politically and socially.
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Jul 25, 2018 22:06:02 GMT
1 So you have used the same argument. 2 That's nice, but in the free world "society" doesn't have any resources, people (individually or in various groups) own the land. Government (just another sort of group) owns some land, but generally has some special use for it. There are two exceptions, fish in the ocean far off shore (closer to shore for citizens) and public use parks. I'm more charitable than that. I make much proper use of public parks so I suppose I owe someone for that. The problem with government in the United States giving handouts is that it has more debt than the people it's helping. Do the math, lady, that's not helping. It proves you're wrong though. What total nonsense. In a social democracy the government raised taxes to fund public programmes, and they often own utilities and public land. The United States does not have a mandate on doing things the best way. Other democracies around the world do it way better. Your country is in a mess of its own making, politically and socially. Then why do so many people want to emigrate to the United States?
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jul 25, 2018 22:15:45 GMT
What total nonsense. In a social democracy the government raised taxes to fund public programmes, and they often own utilities and public land. The United States does not have a mandate on doing things the best way. Other democracies around the world do it way better. Your country is in a mess of its own making, politically and socially. Then why do so many people want to emigrate to the United States? Beats me!
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Jul 25, 2018 22:17:53 GMT
Then why do so many people want to emigrate to the United States? Beats me! Exactly.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Jul 26, 2018 8:42:44 GMT
Well, more than once you've accused me of hating Jews and not wanting them to live, none of which is true. I don't agree with Aj here, but maybe you're not the best one to call him out on what he said. BTW, life is still miserable here, but no boils and locusts yet, thank God. I think I clarified that it was not meant that KLS doesn't have sympathy for others. That was for Cactus. Even KLS said that she tries very hard to understand others. So may be she is not able to express empathy very well. In any case I said the person is no worse than I or you and further clarified that she is nice person and has compassion. Is Cactus the one on the old board who used an avatar of Dr. Who (one of the older incarnations in black & white)? Some of these people changed their names when they moved here, to create an air of mystery perhaps, or in an attempt to keep their reputations from following them.
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Jul 26, 2018 9:45:45 GMT
I think I clarified that it was not meant that KLS doesn't have sympathy for others. That was for Cactus. Even KLS said that she tries very hard to understand others. So may be she is not able to express empathy very well. In any case I said the person is no worse than I or you and further clarified that she is nice person and has compassion. Is Cactus the one on the old board who used an avatar of Dr. Who (one of the older incarnations in black & white)? Some of these people changed their names when they moved here, to create an air of mystery perhaps, or in an attempt to keep their reputations from following them. 🌵 used to go with the name of Zoot_Allure on old boards. I do not remember if he had pic of Dr.Who. I do remember him having a pic of some painter or artist.
|
|
|
Post by The Herald Erjen on Jul 26, 2018 10:02:44 GMT
Is Cactus the one on the old board who used an avatar of Dr. Who (one of the older incarnations in black & white)? Some of these people changed their names when they moved here, to create an air of mystery perhaps, or in an attempt to keep their reputations from following them. 🌵 used to go with the name of Zoot_Allure on old boards. I do not remember if he had pic of Dr.Who. I do remember him having a pic of some painter or artist. Thanks. That's him. He had one or two other names as well IIRC.
|
|
|
Post by 🌵 on Jul 26, 2018 17:12:29 GMT
I think I clarified that it was not meant that KLS doesn't have sympathy for others. That was for Cactus. Even KLS said that she tries very hard to understand others. So may be she is not able to express empathy very well. In any case I said the person is no worse than I or you and further clarified that she is nice person and has compassion. Is Cactus the one on the old board who used an avatar of Dr. Who (one of the older incarnations in black & white)? Some of these people changed their names when they moved here, to create an air of mystery perhaps, or in an attempt to keep their reputations from following them. Yes that was me. Doctor Who is my favourite TV show (well, the '63-'89 series at least, though I do enjoy the new series too). There was no particular reason why I changed my username. I'm just not bothered about always using the same name. I've had many different usernames over the years.
|
|