At DU, what are you: A critical thinker or an emotional responder?

[graywarrior]

Poll question: At DU, what are you: A critical thinker or an emotional responder?

Do you really study both sides or do you stay completely away from the side you absolutely believe you disagree with?

Can you, just for one minute, place yourself in the shoes of someone on the other side and feel what they feel, believe what they believe?

Do you base your decisions and responses on fact?

Do you react or do you respond?

Do you live in the solution or do you live in the problem?

[KittyWampus]

1. I am a Stoic, for the most part. And really do try to assess stuff objectively. However, sometimes

I do get emotional and react. It's human.

And the stupidest stuff I've ever done in life or posted on DU is from allowing myself to get angry.

Edit- and there are some DU'ers who get off on stoking outrage.

Some DU'ers have a special knack for adding levity (calling out Sniffa).

Some DU'ers are notable for appealing to our empathy.

[opihimoimoi]

2. When all else fails...read the friggen directions and THIMK...

LOL

:toast:

[Dennis Donovan]

3. I'm proud to say I'm a critical thinker...

...who empathizes with those who respond emotionally.:)

[Lyric]

4. First one, then the other.

I find my own positions via critical thinking, then defend them passionately.

[BlooInBloo]

5. The measurement is only as good as the measuring stick.

[supernova]

6. 1. Thinking; 2. Emotions

I always respond with logic first, then emotions.

I'm sure that means some might think I'm uncaring in some way if my emotions aren't immediately on display. But it's really not that for me. It's all about trying to find a way to think about the issue first. When I can do that, then I am free to engage my emotions.

[billyoc]

7. I am an ideologue.

[varelse]

8. I've been both - for instance, even with this post, I'm of two minds

The critical thinker in me would like to know what this means to you:

"Do you live in the solution or do you live in the problem?"

The "emotional responder" is whispering "smells like more smug corporate jargon".

...but we'll defer judgement until we see your definition of this term ;)

[madeline_con]

9. Answer to 2nd question...

It depends on the person's P.O.V. There are some beliefs and opinions I absolutely cannot wrap my mind around:

1. Banning private firearm ownership.

2. Outlawing bulldogs.

3. Religious fundametalism that crosses the line from being insane to expecting everyone to live by that particular system of insanity.

4. Any belief that unfairly (according to the DU majority, which is a pretty good standard to use) imposes one's beliefs or rules on others.

There are more, but they arisde as I read post or encounter others' ideas.

[DainBramaged]

10. I like pie

[anndash]

11. Depends on the issue

Most times I try to think about something objectively, but some issues just push my buttons and I react emotionally before I think it through. However, I do believe that both kinds of responses are legitimate (as long as there's no harm done by expressing it) - in my view.

[skooooo]

12. I think everyone is a mixture of both..depending on the topic..

..and their mood.

[gblady]

24. in DBT....

...the goal is to live in the space of the intersect
of the reasoning and emotional mind...
they call it wise mind.

[skooooo]

25. what's DBT??

[TahitiNut]

35. Dialectical Behavioral Therapy

Some might call it "new age" stuff. (Not me, though. I learned to integrate emotional/rational when I was 14.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectical_behavior_therapy

[gblady]

58. I think it's very main stream.....

now, at least in my part of the world.
I just got my Masters in Counseling Psych...
and did a years internship in a community mental health
agency where DBT is used for many clients, both in groups and individually...

It's very effective for some forms of chronic mental illness
and there has been a lot of scientific research on it's effectiveness.

Of course, I am here in Washington, where the founder originates from...
so perhaps that's why it is used so frequently.

It's about emotional regulation, distress tolerance, and improving relationship.
Uses mindfulness techniques, which is what may for some give it a new-age flavor...
although, there is also Mindfulness Based Cognitive Therapy, which is also well researched
and found to be very effective.

[TahitiNut]

63. "Stop. Look. Choose."

My own emotional/spiritual/psychological development has benefited significantly from meditation, mindfulness, and counseling with a cognitive foundation. I'd be the last person to dismiss the efficacy of DBT ... but I'm (thankfully) as far from being bipolar as possible. (I'm a recovering control freak.)

:hi:

[DevonRex]

13. I make sure I can see all sides of an issue, so I'm a critical thinker.

Living in the solution is the only way to go. If you live in the problem, you can become PART of the problem. I never heard an ugly word come out of Martin Luther King's mouth. He was active and inspired others to activism with his words and actions, which were always peaceful EVEN when he was faced with violence.

There are many in history like him. I'd like to follow their lead.

[Warren Stupidity]

14. Generally most people think they are critical thinkers and their opponents are

emotional responders.

[graywarrior]

15. I have ADD

I tend to not study all the facts. I base my decisions on what I think I know. Critical thinking may take me away from my core beliefs. I hate the thought of that. But in order to debate like an intelligent person, I need to understand how both sides affect the outcome.

[rucky]

16. Yes. n/t

[TahitiNut]

17. (ROFL!!) Wow! We got some delusion goin' on here!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Deja Q]

18. ,

:spray: :spray: :spray:

[graywarrior]

19. .

:evilgrin:

[Heidi]

21. Agree. (nt)

[EFerrari]

26. I saw the poll before I clicked on the link.

lol

Hey man, at least they're MY delusions.

:rofl:

[TahitiNut]

31. Hey ... never let it be said that I sneered at a good delusion.

:evilgrin:

[Heidi]

20. Good luck getting people to answer this objectively,

but I'll try to give you an honest answer.

1. No, I don't always really study "both" sides. Both implies only two sides, and on any given issue, there are far more than two sides. My views are formed, for the most part, with a heart and mind toward alleviating suffering where and when I can.

2. Yes. I was raised Southern Baptist in a red state. I remember very well what it was like to have never seen or experienced more than my "beliefs" and my corner of the world.

3. I try to do that, but theocracies like the US generally aren't known for reliance on facts and peer-reviewed studies of social issues.

4. What's the difference between reacting and responding? One could spend a lifetime debating the differences.

5. I try to be part of the solution, but the problems exist, whether I personally live in them or not.

[lonestarnot]

22. Depends, sometimes both.

[Gidney N Cloyd]

23. A co-worker once told me that if they were ever on trial they'd want _me_ on the jury.

Meaning she thought I had an above average tendency to think an issue through from different angels and allow for different sides. I try to live up to that.

[TahitiNut]

33. The last person I'd want is one listening to "different angels."

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Gidney N Cloyd]

37. Oops...

How embarraskin.

[scarletwoman]

45. What? You got a problem with angels who are "different"?

For shame! :spank:

[TahitiNut]

65. (Hmmmm... uh... Huh! Oh.) Sorry, I was contemplating Kate Jackson's jodhpurs.

:evilgrin:

[scarletwoman]

69. jodhpurs? Is that what you kids are calling them these days?

:rofl:

[alfredo]

27. Is this a trick question?

[HEyHEY]

28. HAHAHA this thread really showcases the self delusion of DUers!

only four people will admit they are emotional responders?! HAHA!
I admit it, I get a shot to my gut and react. Half an hour later I'll think about it.

[slackmaster]

29. I'M A CRITICAL THINKER BUT NOBODY ON THIS STUPID FORUM UNDERSTANDS ME!

What is wrong with you people?

[omega minimo]

55. That Sir Is the Most Absurd Display Of What The OP Was Trying To Say But Not Quite Ever!!!1112@@31!!

And The Capitals Prove I Am Write!!!!!1

:kick:

[ColbertWatcher]

66. MAN UP, FRANCIS! n/t

[ColbertWatcher]

68. I am very aloof; I care little about most things.

I have to be inspired emotionally to care enough to do research.

[stillcool]

30. Both...

I exhibit way too many imperfections of the human kind.

[JitterbugPerfume]

32. I am a mix

as are most people

[TahitiNut]

34. Hi, Tom. How's Tony?

:rofl:

[JitterbugPerfume]

39. you are just weird!

:yourock: :rofl:

[TahitiNut]

48. (grin) Heck... 95% of DUers don't even get the allusion.

:silly:

:hug:

[VoodooGuru]

36. My gut tells me I'm a critical thinker.

But after sober reflection I have to admit that I do get emotional sometimes. ;)

[shanti]

38. honestly

an emotional responder, but it doesn't make me or other emotional responders idiots. it takes all kinds.

[Shiver]

40. I consult my pineal gland

And consult with the Goddess. Unless she doesn't respond, in which case I ask myself "What Would Eris Do?"

After that fails, I just try to come up with something funny.

[scarletwoman]

41. Mainly because half the people I was with believed it until I explained the situation to them.

I voted "yes"

sw

[Texasgal]

42. I'm going to be honest here:

I react emotionally.

Then I think about it, sometimes it takes a while... but then after seeing all angles and questioning my feelings I generally am able make a better decision.

I suspect alot of people here on DU are like that and perhaps haven't answered your poll or maybe not honestly.

[JNelson6563]

43. Many of DU's emoters have not taken this poll yet I see.

Too busy emoting I reckon. ;-)

Julie

[Fireweed247]

44. Screw you!

I resent the question and I'm not going to answer it!

[Hepburn]

46. I am a well-thought-out bitch.

Next question?

:hi:

[TahitiNut]

47. Woof!

:evilgrin: ... which goes well with the warp(ed).

[Hepburn]

49. Heya....

...a big WOOF back at cha!

[bridgit]

50. It certainly seems being a 'critical thinker' sometimes ain't all that, where even here at DU...

jumbo-shrimp, military-intelligence, and critical-thinker have that oxymoronic quality going on. I mean Cheney considers himself The Ace critical thinker of his day and look what happened there :(

Or is someone going to come up in here and explain to me that its just a matter of time before America & DU are instructed as to the righteous, golden path of neocon war profiteering :):(

For some people here the solution *is* the problem; so they respond by reacting. One of those modes being thought more genteel, top drawer, with the other slathered in knee-jerk. Some weeks back I posted a snip of the Damon/Pesci exchange from The Good Shepherd where it was splay instead,

Joseph Palmi: Let me ask you something...we Italians, we got our families, and we got the church; the Irish, they have the homeland, Jews their tradition; even the niggers, they got their music. What about you people, Mr. Wilson, what do you have?

Edward Wilson: The United States of America. The rest of you are just visiting.

The point was that some people's positions are not brittle & intransigent. They are doubtless hard, doubtless resolute, and exclude all but they, themselves, and people like them, still...it was explained to me in no uncertain terms that that was fiction: FICTION! Dammit!! Look here...

Peter Pan is 'fiction'


The Good Shepherd is historical fiction


Distinctions are too easily lost ~


Which brings me to facts. It is a fact that rain water is wet. It is a fact that the essential fact of wet rain water (which includes life giving/affirming properties; also facts) is able to be attenuated, or mitigated by the heat of the sun; or matters as seemingly passive as the passing of time down to a residue of what was, a water ring, a sun dried chip of mud. So while some facts are developed over time, isn't that like 'discovery' er'somthin :shrug: others are not so brittle and intransigent as this one:

'Many DUer's have bridgit on ignore because they are intolerant of both her views & her opinions period'

So I don't find it useful-in-every-instance to study both sides, the voluminous copy/paste, the brittle tracts & manifestos, the shrill tippy tapping at the kitchen tables of the world, certainly not as I would attaining a university level degree and such; I do, however, find it important to review all sides. And I do so through my own knowledge & experiential template I try to be fair, but when people get; albeit what is in my opinion 'stuck on stupid', and they will not transit refusing to do so...I hear the clock stop ticking, I look, and it starts ticking backward and I find I have even less time for that. Do *I* ignore *them*? No. Some people are like ambulances coming at you with careening lights blazing & sirens blaring, I want to be able to adjust accordingly. I don't even own a set of ear-buds or whatever they're called.

If I want to be placed in someone else's shoes on a routine basis while I'm being stuffed into everyone else's moccasins that I am to then kick my own ass with...I'll move back in with my mother.

[MedleyMisty]

70. You rock

Just thought you should know.

[Seldona]

51. A mixture.

But I probably lean towards the emotional. IMO if one isn't pissed off by now, one hasn't been paying close enough attention.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

52. ROFLMAO At The Results!!!!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Emotional responder should be winning by a mile if people were honest!

[Umbram]

62. Oh, people are honest.

Those that respond emotionally don't have the capacity to recognize that what they are flinging is anything less than pure syllogisms.

Everyone on DU is frickin' Socrates, don't ya know?

[graywarrior]

53. Wow, according to these results so far, we should be having near zero meltdowns at DU

[omega minimo]

54. Due to all the "emotional responders" critical thinkers eventually quit posting...............

:yoiks:

that and the resident, unrestrained attackers.......

keeps the "discussion" at a certain level :)

[Evoman]

56. I'm an emotional responder...when people defend bigotry, I feel like smashing skulls.

I'm angry, and I don't give a fuck who knows it.

[W_HAMILTON]

57. Critical thinkers, my ass.

It seems like a lot of people don't even read what other people post around here. How many times have you seen someone go into a rage at the mere title of a thread, and then realize that the person clearly didn't even read the rest of the message?

I said I'm am emotional responder, as are the majority of the people here at DU, even though apparently many would like to think of themselves as otherwise.

I've always felt that most DUers talk at you, not to you. Sometimes it seems the only way to get a reply is to respond to someone directly (in which case they usually respond back), or say something outrageous, which sets off a barrage of posts from all the "critical thinkers" around here :)

[Oak2004]

59. How about "both"?

I suspect that "both" is factually accurate for the vast majority of people.

Research has shown that emotions are actually helpful in decision making. Our emotions are often based on sound, barely conscious, assessments of a situation. I sure wouldn't wait at a bus stop if I had a bad feeling about the situation, because there's a very good chance my "bad feeling" is the result of subconsciously observing genuine danger signs. If we didn't have good "intuition" about such things, our species would have gone extinct on the floor of a smilodon den tens of thousands of years ago.

Moreover actually getting at facts is not as easy as it seems -- senses mislead us, appearances mislead us, cultural biases mislead us, it's often impossible to assess the facts of a given situation in the absence of a formal study (which we can do only rarely). A lot of times when we think we are reasoning based on the facts of the situation, we're actually engaged in some combination of erroneous belief and self-delusion.

On the other hand, I don't need to explain what's wrong with opinions formed in the absence of reason. That kind of stupidity, and its aftermath, is commonplace. It's one thing to live in a world where the truth can be elusive; it's another thing altogether to recklessly disregard truth.

Once I've come to a conclusion with a great deal of certainty I don't spend a lot of time revisiting it. Perpetually reevaluating questions, in the absence of significant new information, that have been resolved already with a high degree of certainty isn't being "open minded" -- it's being indecisive, confused, and inefficient in one's thinking. In fact one can say, with a high degree of certainty, that to endlessly revisit questions already resolved with a high degree of certainty is irrational (formal studies exist which back that conclusion). I'm not open minded about whether or not the earth is flat, or whether perpetual motion machines are possible, or whether there is any merit in Warren's bigotry, nor should I be.

[Blue_In_AK]

60. I think of myself as a realist and critical thinker.

And, by the way, GrayWarrior, I'm glad to see that rumors of your demise were greatly exaggerated. :rofl:

[Umbram]

61. The joy of this poll is that the reactionary types aren't self-reflective enough

to recognize it and will happily deem themselves critical thinkers.

[MedleyMisty]

64. I admit that I find it very very hard to imagine myself in the place of a bigot

I've studied the psychology of prejudice. I've read personal essays by prejudiced people and people who used to be prejudiced. I've tried. But I just cannot accept or empathize with hate. I can intellectually understand that people who hate are very damaged and sick and ignorant. But I find that I cannot accept them forcing their illness on to other people and ruining lives.

I do generally scroll by the posts of prejudiced people when they're being confrontational and defensive, but I seek out their personal stories - I can learn the most from people when they aren't defensive and are just being open and honest and sharing.

This issue is actually pretty personal to me now - my husband and I went to see Milk last night, and in dicussions afterwards....well, I slept on the couch last night. And I'm trying now to understand his positions - he's not prejudiced, or I would have gone home to my mother's last night and be reading Divorce for Dummies now. It's just - apparently he thinks that everyone being fucked over by bigoted humans has to just take it. I agree with his basic premise that most humans have less mental capacity than our cats, but it's just - it felt like there was this huge sucking hole in my soul when he used the "Aren't civil unions good enough for now?" argument. God, I'm sobbing now again thinking about it. I don't fucking care that most humans are selfish and stupid with the moral reasoning capacity of a pile of shit. That doesn't make it okay and acceptable. I can't accept that it's okay for some people to be considered three fifths of a human now in hopes of their great great great grandchildren maybe making it up to the status of three fourths of a human. There's a huge moral difference between acknowledging that the human species becomes less psychopathic very very slowly and finding that emotionally and morally acceptable. One is saying "Our species is terribly unjust, but right now I see you as a full and complete person and I support your rights." and the other is saying "Our species is terribly unjust so shut up, sit down, and accept being expendable trash."

Maybe it's that old F/T dichotomy - even if you're not into Myers-Briggs you can see that some people are more emotional and others are more logical, and he scores a bit over on the rational side and I am way way over at the far end of the feeling side.

I have found, in years of reading internet debates, that my emotions generally lead me to agree with those who champion logic. We're on the same road to the same place but we use different traffic signals and that causes a lot of problems. Like maybe my husband really wasn't saying that oppressed people should just shut up and sit down. Maybe he was expressing the first meaning in language that sounded to my perception like the second meaning because of differences in how we communicate and where we place emotional emphasis - and that may not even be related to our different places on the thinking/feeling scale but more our different genders and how we grew up. Like once I remember he couldn't understand why I got upset when he used the terms I and you instead of we to answer a question about us, and later I read a book on communication and found that it was a common misunderstanding between women and men - men didn't see the emotional difference because they're more socialized to see verbal communication as just a pure information exchange.

And of course I have a lot of trouble understanding other humans in general because I grew up pretty isolated with a completely hands off mother who didn't socialize or indoctrinate me much. That's why I tend to assume that other people choose to be fundamentalist and prejudiced - I am using myself as my idea of normal and I was left free to come up with my own internal structure and beliefs as a kid.

Anyway, to answer the question - I like to think of myself as a critical feeler. I do respond first and foremost with my emotions, but I am willing to do some introspection and try my best to realize where I'm wrong and to empathize with others, even those who hurt other people - by the way, I am perfectly fine with empathizing with people who do their hurting up close and personal. It's the impersonal machinery of large groups that I can't empathize with. I can understand the actions of a soldier in a war and see his or her individual humanity even if he or she does horrible things. I cannot understand people who sit in front of the TV and cheer for the death and maiming and torture of others at all.

I don't know - I guess that reading all those Holocaust books when I was nine left a very deep impression on me. Huh - maybe it's akin to being raised in a fundamentalist family? Like maybe that sick feeling like everything is wrong and like I can't stand to be human when I think of stuff that probably subconsciously brings up the images of the Holocaust is what someone who grew up being fed ideas of going to hell for violating some rules feels when they hear about those rules being violated?

I don't know - I've been hanging out with the cats and sobbing my guts out since my husband went to work. Maybe now I'll go eat a pizza to feel better, and think of some non-confrontational ways to talk stuff out this evening.

[annabanana]

67. both I'm not above reacting from the gut when something outrages

me. (Usually a response to something on a TV droning on in the background) Sometimes I'll revisit the subject when I've had a chance to read more about it and reflect..

[Swamp Rat]

71. I'm an argon stimulator from south-side Ulan Bator, a self-styled master thinker and a photon

rasterbator. :D

[MedleyMisty]

72. Emotional thinker

[StudsT]

73. BOTH

thats what i like about being Human ;)

StudsT