Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Still Waters

Dogmatic people seek less information

48 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Dejarma
1 hour ago, papageorge1 said:

 

Common sense is not to dismiss a body of cases but to give fair consideration.

if i've given something fair consideration & feel a need to dismiss it- is that ok?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
moonman
57 minutes ago, Dejarma said:

if i've given something fair consideration & feel a need to dismiss it- is that ok?

Only if you want to get ripped on by a dogmatic believer.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
papageorge1
2 hours ago, Dejarma said:

if i've given something fair consideration & feel a need to dismiss it- is that ok?

Yes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dejarma
21 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

Yes. 

now, this is interesting:

why do you assume that if someone disagrees with your outlook, opinion (or others who feel the same as you) they have not given fair consideration to the subject at hand?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
papageorge1
Just now, Dejarma said:

now, this is interesting:

why do you assume that if someone disagrees with your outlook, opinion (or others who feel the same as you) they have not given fair consideration to the subject at hand?

I do not assume that although that may be the case. The other possibility is that we have a difference of opinion after fair consideration.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dejarma
1 minute ago, papageorge1 said:

I do not assume that although that may be the case. The other possibility is that we have a difference of opinion after fair consideration.

so don't suggest that people who disagree with you don't do their 'homework' / 'look into it before commenting 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
papageorge1
2 minutes ago, Dejarma said:

so don't suggest that people who disagree with you don't do their 'homework' / 'look into it before commenting 

I will continue to do that when I feel it applies in a particular case.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bendy Demon
4 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

On the other hand, catmatic people are always curious.

Sorry..when I seen the term 'catmatic' I was thinking of....cats. :blush:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XenoFish
4 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

I will continue to do that when I feel it applies in a particular case.

So every chance you get then.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dejarma
3 minutes ago, papageorge1 said:

I will continue to do that when I feel it applies in a particular case.

hmmm, that's suggesting there are some in here who just reply without thinking first... who are they?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ChrLzs

Papa, how about giving an example?  One where the claim was dismissed by skeptics unfairly, and you were shown to be right.

It's just that my flawed memory suggests there hasn't been a single case ... many cases where you demonstrably.. er .. 'won'.

 

So surely you'd want to take this opportunity to prove how flawed the memories of skeptics are, by posting a really good example?  I know I'm ready to apologise... it will be a cathartic and memorable change to my whole worldview...

Edited by ChrLzs
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
openozy
1 hour ago, ChrLzs said:

I know I'm ready to apologise

How about you give an example of a genuine apology you have given someone on here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
ChrLzs

 

:D I'm guessing those aren't quite what you are after.  But I wasn't talking about previous occasions - I've committed to doing it HERE and NOW, so there are 2 things you can now do:

1. YOU point out any where I didn't apologise and should have.  Really, that's what you should have done in your posting - a decent, honest, valuable poster would do that, I reckon.

and / or

2. Help out Papageorge.  Post your best example where skeptics were unnecessarily harsh, proven wrong, and should have apologised...

 

Or you can just keep on whining and handwaving, if you think that gains cred..

Edited by ChrLzs
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
third_eye

A little reminder... totally under rated 

Quote

 

[00.04:09]

~

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker
On 11/22/2020 at 12:25 AM, Still Waters said:

People who are dogmatic about their views seek less information and make less accurate judgements as a result, even on simple matters unrelated to politics, according to a study led by UCL and Max Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics researchers.

The researchers say their findings, published in PNAS, point to differences in thinking patterns that lead people to hold rigid opinions.

Dogmatic people are characterized by a belief that their worldview reflects an absolute truth and are often resistant to change their mind, for example when it comes to partisan issues. This tendency can have societal impacts by polarizing political, scientific and religious debates. However, the cognitive drivers of dogmatism are still poorly understood.

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-11-dogmatic-people-uncertain.html

Well i would have thought that was b......obvious :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dejarma
On 11/22/2020 at 4:42 AM, openozy said:

How about you give an example of a genuine apology you have given someone on here.

how about you give us an example of what ChrLzs asked

Edited by Dejarma

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dejarma
On 11/22/2020 at 2:54 AM, ChrLzs said:

Papa, how about giving an example?  One where the claim was dismissed by skeptics unfairly, and you were shown to be right.

isn't it fascinating:clap: i luv this place:nw:

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
openozy
19 hours ago, ChrLzs said:

 

:D I'm guessing those aren't quite what you are after.  But I wasn't talking about previous occasions - I've committed to doing it HERE and NOW, so there are 2 things you can now do:

1. YOU point out any where I didn't apologise and should have.  Really, that's what you should have done in your posting - a decent, honest, valuable poster would do that, I reckon.

and / or

2. Help out Papageorge.  Post your best example where skeptics were unnecessarily harsh, proven wrong, and should have apologised...

 

Or you can just keep on whining and handwaving, if you think that gains cred..

Your humbleness knows no bounds Charley.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ChrLzs
1 minute ago, openozy said:

Your humbleness knows no bounds Charley.

It's almost as huge as your avoidance.  Why not bring me down by simply answering the questions asked of you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
openozy
36 minutes ago, Dejarma said:

how about you give us an example of what ChrLzs asked

An example, lol. How about the fact most paranormal posts cannot be proven not to be genuine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
openozy
6 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

It's almost as huge as your avoidance.  Why not bring me down by simply answering the questions asked of you?

Sad you will never win on this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ChrLzs
11 minutes ago, openozy said:

An example, lol. How about the fact most paranormal posts cannot be proven not to be genuine.

?????????  Yeah, just exactly like I can't prove that I'm not a pink unicorn.  What an absolutely pointless and ridiculously daft thing to say - you still don't understand the burden of proof concept, even after all the times you've had it explained to you?

JUST ONE example with proof would change the ballgame, and I'd be delighted to be proven wrong.

But you cannot post that single example, as there isn't one.

Oh well, maybe papa has more cojones.... hmm.. Where did he go? 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
openozy
3 hours ago, ChrLzs said:

and I'd be delighted to be proven wrong.

And I'd be delighted if you could prove me wrong on the paranormal, but you can't, not one time. It's that one fact that skeptics can't get over. We aren't in court so you can shove your " burden of proof concept".

  • Haha 2

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.