Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
coberst

Can’t we just hold it?

13 posts in this topic

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?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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...! :cry:

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...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

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.

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.

You are driving to fast?

A good reason to slow down.

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

That depends upon what neighborhood you are in.

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.

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?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

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 :(

Edited by Warbringer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Who is this guy and why doesn't he make sense to me...! :cry:

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...

:D

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.

:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.