Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

dballance

(5,756 posts)
3. The Narrow Constraints On How People Should Think? Seriously You Must be Joking.
Sun Dec 30, 2012, 02:06 PM
Dec 2012

I can't think of any organizations like the Roman Catholic Church or Westboro Baptist that wish to enforce their narrow constraints on what they feel people should think. Unless we take into account the Saudi Religious police or the Taliban that was more than happy to try to assassinate a girl because she wanted to go to school. Do you really want to go there?

Both of those organizations and their ilk have a long history of trying to make people conform to what they believe and trying to make people think what they believe is right. Perhaps you've forgotten the Crusades, the Inquisition and the Salem witch trials. Not to mention those holier than thou Puritians were more than happy to execute Quakers for their beliefs in the early colonies.

So get a clue.

Academic Economics vs. wishful thinking. Speck Tater Dec 2012 #1
Um? They are being taught, but as usual you have no clue of what you are talking about humblebum Dec 2012 #2
The Narrow Constraints On How People Should Think? Seriously You Must be Joking. dballance Dec 2012 #3
Totally, absolutely serious, however I did not say that the party referenced is, humblebum Dec 2012 #4
Fine example of binary thinking. rug Dec 2012 #5
No doubt tama Dec 2012 #6
Not to mention that binary thinking can also occur within the construct of different humblebum Dec 2012 #7
Can't we just teach that other ways of thinking exist? timesamillion Dec 2012 #8
Oh, other ways skepticscott Dec 2012 #9
The village collection LARED Dec 2012 #10
If they are, they've shown no evidence of it skepticscott Dec 2012 #11
Probably that your exclusivistic POV is so narrow and unyielding even in the humblebum Dec 2012 #12
So agreeing with your opinion would be sufficient evidence? Yes? nt LARED Dec 2012 #13
You can't even specify skepticscott Dec 2012 #14
To be clear I am referring to your opinion not just any opinion LARED Dec 2012 #23
What a lame horseshit dodge that is skepticscott Dec 2012 #25
... tama Dec 2012 #27
The dodge is on you. LARED Dec 2012 #28
No, YOU claimed SS had an opinion about something, so just what was it. cleanhippie Dec 2012 #29
I lied? Please back that up. LARED Dec 2012 #30
What. Is. SkepticScotts. Opinion? cleanhippie Jan 2013 #31
So I didn't lie, you did. Ok I understand your motivation LARED Jan 2013 #32
You may be able to convince yourself, but you cannot fool Jesus! cleanhippie Jan 2013 #33
Thinking and knowing tama Dec 2012 #15
Frankly, nothing you ever say makes much sense mr blur Dec 2012 #16
Why "what exactly", not "how"? tama Dec 2012 #18
I have no idea Laochtine Dec 2012 #17
Just five senses? tama Dec 2012 #19
For the purposes of empirical assessment, the 5 external senses are still the only ones considered. humblebum Dec 2012 #20
"Gut feeling" tama Dec 2012 #21
Thank you. humblebum Dec 2012 #22
Despite my days boxing Laochtine Jan 2013 #34
Did so tama Jan 2013 #36
I'd like to go on Laochtine Jan 2013 #35
Experience as such and ability to learn from experience tama Jan 2013 #37
This message was self-deleted by its author Deep13 Dec 2012 #24
Surely its possible we can obtain knowledge without conventional conscious thought NoOneMan Dec 2012 #26
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»Yes, let teach those &quo...»Reply #3