Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Can’t we just hold it?


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1    coberst

coberst

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 409 posts
  • Joined:06 Oct 2008

Posted 14 May 2009 - 11:11 AM

Can’t we just hold it?

Accept or reject are not the only options one has. The most important and generally overlooked, especially by the young, is the option to ‘hold’.

It appears to me that many young people consider that ‘to be negative is to be cool’. This leads them into responding that ‘X is false’ when responding to an OP that states that ‘X is true’.

When a person takes a public position affirming or denying the truth of ‘Y’ they are often locking themselves into a difficult position. If their original position was based on opinion rather than judgment their ego will not easily allow them to change position once they have studied and analyzed ‘Y’.

The moral of this story is that holding a default position of ‘reject or accept’, when we are ignorant, is not smart because our ego will fight any attempt to modify the opinion with a later judgment. Silence, or questions directed at comprehending the matter under consideration, is the smart decision for everyone’s default position.

Our options are reject, accept, and hold. I claim that ‘hold’ is the most important and should be the most often used because everyone is ignorant of almost everything.

Do you accept, reject, or hold judgment regarding my claim?




#2    Black Red Devil

Black Red Devil

    Mean as Hell

  • Member
  • 2,355 posts
  • Joined:04 Oct 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sydney

  • I would if I could
    But I can't, so I won't

Posted 14 May 2009 - 11:26 AM

I reject your claim because you are basically saying that to 'sit on the fence' is the best way to go until we know better.  If that was the case, in human history we would have never had explorers or people pushing the boundaries for new discoveries.  Everybody would have kept on debating and 'holding' onto decisions forever.

We are each our own devil, and we make this world our hell

- Oscar Wilde

#3    schizoidwoman

schizoidwoman

    The roosting goose...

  • Member
  • 12,538 posts
  • Joined:03 Mar 2009
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Up a steep hill in Yorkshire

  • Much mischief is done by the misuse of mercury...

Posted 14 May 2009 - 11:52 AM

BlackRedLittleDevil on May 14 2009, 12:26 PM, said:

I reject your claim because you are basically saying that to 'sit on the fence' is the best way to go until we know better.  If that was the case, in human history we would have never had explorers or people pushing the boundaries for new discoveries.  Everybody would have kept on debating and 'holding' onto decisions forever.


I also reject your claim and for the same reasons that BLRD puts forward in the preceding post.  

I think it's natural for humans to debate and and question and it's by doing so that we often make new discoveries of both widespread and personal significance.

Edited by schizoidwoman, 14 May 2009 - 11:52 AM.


#4    Purplos

Purplos

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,552 posts
  • Joined:03 Apr 2005
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Fighting ennui in suburban NJ

  • Everything important is infinite.

Posted 14 May 2009 - 01:20 PM

I think it totally depends on the topic being discussed. Some things can be accepted or rejected immediately based on personal belief, knowledge or experience. Other things should be set to 'hold' until further info is gathered.

Suggesting that the response to any discussion should be the same (ie a defacto hold position) is as damaging as blanket acceptance or rejection.  People need to come up with the best response for individual instances.

Embrace the impossible.

#5    greggK

greggK

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,756 posts
  • Joined:14 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:alabama, USA

Posted 14 May 2009 - 03:35 PM

coberst on May 14 2009, 06:11 AM, said:

Can’t we just hold it?

Accept or reject are not the only options one has. The most important and generally overlooked, especially by the young, is the option to ‘hold’.

It appears to me that many young people consider that ‘to be negative is to be cool’. This leads them into responding that ‘X is false’ when responding to an OP that states that ‘X is true’.

When a person takes a public position affirming or denying the truth of ‘Y’ they are often locking themselves into a difficult position. If their original position was based on opinion rather than judgment their ego will not easily allow them to change position once they have studied and analyzed ‘Y’.

The moral of this story is that holding a default position of ‘reject or accept’, when we are ignorant, is not smart because our ego will fight any attempt to modify the opinion with a later judgment. Silence, or questions directed at comprehending the matter under consideration, is the smart decision for everyone’s default position.

Our options are reject, accept, and hold. I claim that ‘hold’ is the most important and should be the most often used because everyone is ignorant of almost everything.

Do you accept, reject, or hold judgment regarding my claim?


To hold the opinion of any subject is to build on the base of acceptance or rejection.  To postulate on an action is to deny the action.  The action, though, has taken place.  All postulations are a result of the first postulation.  
If you say that X is true then you are saying notX is false.  But, notX is just as true as X.  



It is me!

#6    N080DY

N080DY

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 113 posts
  • Joined:06 May 2009
  • Gender:Male

Posted 14 May 2009 - 03:55 PM

greggK on May 14 2009, 06:35 PM, said:

To hold the opinion of any subject is to build on the base of acceptance or rejection.  To postulate on an action is to deny the action.  The action, though, has taken place.  All postulations are a result of the first postulation.  
If you say that X is true then you are saying notX is false.  But, notX is just as true as X.

Who is this guy and why doesn't he make sense to me...!  crying.gif

If we don't know about the subject or the person who represents it, yes, I think holding would be the best case... Heh... Could be that I accept things too easily... I don't see the difficulty some people have on changing their opinion though...


#7    Wyvernkeeper

Wyvernkeeper

    Paranormal Investigator

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 864 posts
  • Joined:10 Nov 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

Posted 14 May 2009 - 04:02 PM

coberst on May 14 2009, 12:11 PM, said:

Can’t we just hold it?

Accept or reject are not the only options one has. The most important and generally overlooked, especially by the young, is the option to ‘hold’.

It appears to me that many young people consider that ‘to be negative is to be cool’. This leads them into responding that ‘X is false’ when responding to an OP that states that ‘X is true’.

When a person takes a public position affirming or denying the truth of ‘Y’ they are often locking themselves into a difficult position. If their original position was based on opinion rather than judgment their ego will not easily allow them to change position once they have studied and analyzed ‘Y’.

The moral of this story is that holding a default position of ‘reject or accept’, when we are ignorant, is not smart because our ego will fight any attempt to modify the opinion with a later judgment. Silence, or questions directed at comprehending the matter under consideration, is the smart decision for everyone’s default position.

Our options are reject, accept, and hold. I claim that ‘hold’ is the most important and should be the most often used because everyone is ignorant of almost everything.

Do you accept, reject, or hold judgment regarding my claim?


I think this a very good post, well done.. The ego does often force people to make a snap decision on a complicated issue which often, they have a limited perception of.

I will come back and discuss this more if the thread is still going when im less busy.

Peace

btw:  your comment about younger people, spot on...   especially in the academic world.  Students seem to like their cynicism, at least at my uni.

Edited by Wyvernkeeper, 14 May 2009 - 04:03 PM.


#8    Virtual Particle

Virtual Particle

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,424 posts
  • Joined:15 Dec 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Miami,Florida

  • c^2= (d/t)^2 = d^2/t^2 = (d^2) x (1/t^2)...Time is squared

Posted 14 May 2009 - 10:04 PM

Presenting a moderate position to all circumstances could probably be as annoying to those who present either left or right political views and lately it has become a factor (somewhat) in political circles. A simple answer Coberst would be to say it depends on the situation if for example a person’s shirt catches fire holding judgment about what to do is probably not a good idea. In relation to reacting to a stressor there are fight and flight but there is also freeze.

Any thoughts?


Time is a form of communication
Consciousness transcends all states
that can be perceived as matter
Matter communicates its existence
to consciousness through time        
Man is infinite
God is more
Black Hole Creates Spectacular Light Show

#9    sepulchrave

sepulchrave

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,768 posts
  • Joined:19 Apr 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 15 May 2009 - 12:23 AM

coberst on May 14 2009, 05:11 AM, said:

Can’t we just hold it?

Accept or reject are not the only options one has. The most important and generally overlooked, especially by the young, is the option to ‘hold’.

It appears to me that many young people consider that ‘to be negative is to be cool’. This leads them into responding that ‘X is false’ when responding to an OP that states that ‘X is true’.

When a person takes a public position affirming or denying the truth of ‘Y’ they are often locking themselves into a difficult position. If their original position was based on opinion rather than judgment their ego will not easily allow them to change position once they have studied and analyzed ‘Y’.

The moral of this story is that holding a default position of ‘reject or accept’, when we are ignorant, is not smart because our ego will fight any attempt to modify the opinion with a later judgment. Silence, or questions directed at comprehending the matter under consideration, is the smart decision for everyone’s default position.

Our options are reject, accept, and hold. I claim that ‘hold’ is the most important and should be the most often used because everyone is ignorant of almost everything.

Do you accept, reject, or hold judgment regarding my claim?


In the context of hypotheticals/theories/philosophies/ideas, etc. I accept your claim in general.

I will also claim that in that context if people were able to accept that disagreement over a particular issue is not a personal offense then the question is less important. If we can have more `friendly disagreement' then I think people will have a more open mind, and then their initial stand on a particular topic is less important.



#10    coberst

coberst

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 409 posts
  • Joined:06 Oct 2008

Posted 15 May 2009 - 09:10 AM


Iraq has weapons of mass destruction.
Freud and Darwin are frauds.
God made me.
You are driving too fast.

When faced with these statements does it matter which of the three buttons ‘accept, reject, or hold’ that you push?

Just what impact does a decision of 'reject or accept' have on my future considerations?

It is my assumption that such a decision causes me to either stop or at least to slow down any further consideration of the matter.  It appears to me that many of our conclusions are “worked out” within our unconscious, especially while we sleep.

Our educational system is designed around the basic premise that the students will accept what is told to them and that this acceptance is very important for their future welfare and for the welfare of the community.





#11    Virtual Particle

Virtual Particle

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,424 posts
  • Joined:15 Dec 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Miami,Florida

  • c^2= (d/t)^2 = d^2/t^2 = (d^2) x (1/t^2)...Time is squared

Posted 16 May 2009 - 02:34 AM


Quote

Iraq has weapons of mass destruction?


I would respond that if the Army of the Russian Republic had the city of Grozny (in Chechnya) surrounded for eight months and were still being fired upon by "Chechen Rebels" then there must be tunnels.

Quote

Freud and Darwin are frauds?


Really does not matter to me I am pretty much engaged in understanding things from the context of what Native American Indian Shamans felt was important to tell me. One can help but understand that either one could be considered frauds when current morality would be taken into condition, given current ability to access someone’s life. In fact they are some of the precursors, to us accepting the scientific method as a means to address reality.

Quote

God made me?


It’s a word that spelled backwards means dog, the significance of which is only really appreciated within the context of certain cultures.

Quote

You are driving to fast?


A good reason to slow down.

Quote

Just what impact does a decision of 'reject or accept' have on my future considerations?


That depends upon what neighborhood you are in.

QUOTE
It is my assumption that such a decision causes me to either stop or at least to slow down any further consideration of the matter. It appears to me that many of our conclusions are “worked out” within our unconscious, especially while we sleep


Yes in fact if memory serves the first stage of dreaming involves just that, resolving the days problems.

QUOTE
Our educational system is designed around the basic premise that the students will accept what is told to them and that this acceptance is very important for their future welfare and for the welfare of the community.


Ok but do not take that too seriously.

Any thoughts?







Time is a form of communication
Consciousness transcends all states
that can be perceived as matter
Matter communicates its existence
to consciousness through time        
Man is infinite
God is more
Black Hole Creates Spectacular Light Show

#12    Alchera

Alchera

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 372 posts
  • Joined:14 Feb 2009
  • Gender:Male

  • This world is life
    This “clouds-and-wonders”
    Is all I need
    And it will never go

Posted 17 May 2009 - 09:28 PM

If you talking about this forum itself I've always disliked it when people try and end threads as quickly as possible with some smart comment. On some forums it's just "no" then everyone starts ridiculing the OP sad.gif

Edited by Warbringer, 17 May 2009 - 09:33 PM.

Posted Image

#13    greggK

greggK

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,756 posts
  • Joined:14 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:alabama, USA

Posted 18 May 2009 - 12:44 PM

N080DY on May 14 2009, 10:55 AM, said:

Who is this guy and why doesn't he make sense to me...!  crying.gif

If we don't know about the subject or the person who represents it, yes, I think holding would be the best case... Heh... Could be that I accept things too easily... I don't see the difficulty some people have on changing their opinion though...


grin2.gif

Quote

To hold the opinion of any subject is to build on the base of acceptance or rejection. To postulate on an action is to deny the action. The action, though, has taken place. All postulations are a result of the first postulation.
If you say that X is true then you are saying notX is false. But, notX is just as true as X.


Evidence of the rightness or wrongness of a situation is usually what everybody waits for.  But, to question whether or not something happened is to first deny it even though it did take place.  The first question was 'Adam, where are you?'
It was not 'What have you done?'  Because God did not know that Adam had done anything.  If Adam would have answered 'Over here, God just eating a snack,' God probably would have asked, 'Why do you look like a tree?'
If you say that there is no God, then the opposite of that is false.  That would say that there is no God and a God is false which is the Atheist model.  But, that is just one side of the equation and it leaves out the possibility of a God.

laugh.gif


It is me!




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users