|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Being offended. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
What does any of this have to do with the idea of teaching people not to be offended is better? Are you so in the dark that you don't see what is happening everyday? Are you just asking me these questions because you are avoiding the topic and you are just trying to find something to nit-pick about that has nothing to do with the topic? It's really not hard to use google.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
Well put.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
Here is my conversation with chat gtp. It seems to agree.
Mod-it RCIs there more value in teaching how not to be offended than teaching how not to offend? Teaching both how not to be offended and how not to offend can be valuable. Avoiding offense can help promote respect and understanding, while avoiding being easily offended can help increase resilience and reduce unnecessary conflicts. Ultimately, both skills are important for healthy communication and relationships. Mod-it RCYou didn't answer my question My apologies, let me clarify. In my opinion, it's important to address both aspects of the issue. While teaching how not to offend is crucial in promoting respect and empathy, teaching how not to be easily offended can foster resilience and reduce unnecessary conflicts. Ultimately, both skills are necessary for healthy communication and relationships. Mod-it RCYou still did not answer my question. I need a straight forward answer. It is subjective and depends on individual perspectives whether there is more value in teaching how not to be offended or how not to offend. Both approaches can have benefits and drawbacks, and the importance placed on each may vary based on the context and cultural norms. Mod-it RCIs it possible to never offend anyone? No, it is not possible to never offend anyone. Offending someone is an inevitable part of human communication and interactions, even with the best intentions and efforts to avoid it. Different people have different values, beliefs, and sensitivities, and what may be perceived as innocuous by one person can be offensive to another. The goal should not be to never offend anyone, but rather to treat others with respect, be mindful of their feelings, and apologize sincerely if offense is taken. Mod-it RCIs it possible to learn how not to be offended? Yes, it is possible to learn how not to be easily offended. This can involve developing resilience, learning to manage one's emotions, and having a growth mindset. It can also involve developing empathy and understanding for others, as well as increasing self-awareness and learning to recognize and challenge one's own biases and assumptions. By working on these skills, individuals can become better equipped to handle potentially offensive situations and communicate effectively with others. However, it's important to note that everyone has different triggers and sensitivities, and some experiences may still be deeply hurtful, regardless of personal growth. Mod-it RCSince one is possible and the other isn't, there is more value in learning how not to be offended Yes, that is a valid perspective. While it may not be possible to never offend anyone, it is possible to learn how not to be easily offended. By developing resilience, empathy, and self-awareness, individuals can improve their ability to handle potentially offensive situations and communicate effectively with others. This can lead to stronger relationships and reduce unnecessary conflicts. Of course, different individuals and cultures may place different levels of importance on avoiding offense versus avoiding being easily offended, and both skills are important for healthy communication and relationships. Mod-it RCI never said both skills aren't important My apologies, I misunderstood. Yes, both skills, avoiding offense and avoiding being easily offended, are important for healthy communication and relationships. However, depending on the context and individual perspectives, the emphasis placed on each may vary. In some situations, learning how not to be easily offended may be prioritized due to its potential for personal growth and improving communication skills. In other situations, the focus may be more on avoiding offense due to cultural norms and social expectations. Both skills are valuable, and it can be beneficial to work on developing both. Mod-it RCYou are rambling My apologies, I will try to be more concise. Both avoiding offense and avoiding being easily offended are important skills for healthy communication and relationships. The emphasis placed on each may vary depending on context and individual perspectives. Developing both skills can lead to stronger relationships and reduce conflicts. Mod-it RCBut which one is more valuable, be concise. It is difficult to determine which one is more valuable as both avoiding offense and avoiding being easily offended are important skills for healthy communication and relationships. The value placed on each may vary depending on the context and individual perspectives. Mod-it RCBut you just said my perspective is a valid one since one is possible and the other not. Yes, you are correct. Based on the premise that it is possible to learn how not to be easily offended, but not possible to never offend anyone, one could argue that there is more value in learning how not to be easily offended. This perspective prioritizes personal growth and effective communication. However, it's important to note that both skills are still valuable and necessary for healthy relationships. Mod-it RCAgain you are pointing out that both skills are valuable when I didn't ask that question I apologize for any confusion. To answer your question, based on the premise that it is possible to learn how not to be easily offended but not possible to never offend anyone, one could argue that there is more value in learning how not to be easily offended. Mod-it RCSo why didn't you give that answer to start? I apologize for not providing a clear answer earlier. As an AI language model, I aim to provide comprehensive and balanced information to the best of my abilities. However, in my previous answers, I failed to clearly prioritize one skill over the other, as I was trying to acknowledge the importance of both avoiding offense and avoiding being easily offended. I understand now that a concise answer to your question was what you were seeking, and I apologize for not providing that sooner. Regenerate response ChatGPT Jan 30 Version. Free Research Preview. Our goal is to make AI systems more natural and safe to interact with. Your feedback will help us improve.New chat Teaching Avoiding Offend/Offense Big Bang Origin of MatterNew chat New chat Clear conversations Light mode OpenAI Discord Updates & FAQ Log out
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined:
|
Yes I noticed the easily part, I let it slide. I could have got it to say it without it. I used gtp's own answers, no goal posts were moved imo.
Gotta say though, conversing with gtp is very similar to conversing with a raging liberal. Later on I had a conversation about what it bases it's knowledge on, and then it became obvious why it felt like talking to a liberal.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined:
|
No, it gave me the answer I thought was correct, something many of you in here are incapable of. If someone could show me why I am wrong, I will change my mind.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
Your insults are not productive. It's why I could never take anything you say as credible.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
Of course I know the difference between faith and fact. It seems you don't know the difference between that and what I was asking it. Who is dim witted now? Listen I understand that realizing that the system you believe in requires faith (notice the redundancy) is a tough pill to swallow.
If I ask you if the sun will rise tomorrow, you cannot tell me with 100% certainty that it will until it is observed. You have to believe it will. If I tell you there is a heaven, I cannot say it with 100% certainty, we can only believe there is. It's a very simple premise, please show me how I am wrong, preferably without insults to make it more convincing. FYI my whole life is based on observation and fact. Cannot live without it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
Lots of evidence versus NO evidence. Statistically highly probable versus ZERO probability See, you don't understand science. Zero probability would prove God doesn't exist. Nothing in science is ever proven. Of course there are levels of faith, Jesus even expressed that. There is plenty of evidence God exist, it's just subjective.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
No, you religious fanatic. We can extrapolate from experience and have a near certain confidence that the physics will work as it always has LOLOLOLOL. Thanks for proving me right. Let's use your own words. Definition of "near certain confidence" = high level of trust = high level of faith = faith. Please show me where I said that the laws of physics wouldn't happen. You just assumed that is what I meant by saying there is a possibility the sun won't rise tomorrow. How very scientific of you. You are just another person in here who does not practice what they preach.
The only ones who dabble in 100% certainty are religious idiots certain of their ghost's voice in their heads Wrong. Jesus said if you have enough faith, you can move a mountain. Pretty sure no one has that kind of faith. Not a single Christian has 100% faith. If they say that, they are lying.
No. You have 0% certainty since you have no evidentiary basis to form such a ridiculous conjecture. Without evidence your heaven is 0% certain, 100% non-existent I have evidence, it's just subjective. Just like my love for my children is subjective.
you love facts then you will know these answers, why these answers are as they are and know that you haven't the capacity to challenge the science involved There were people in the bible who saw God's works and still didn't believe. I guess that's why Jesus had to come. What are you the god of science? Lmao. I've already proven in this forum that I have a firm grasp of science and how it works. I am a master of 3 different trades over 40 years, was a director of facilities for a large medical facility, and do 3d design using solidworks, and 3d printing for over 10 years. I design and program drones for fun. I am an expert at troubleshooting which requires the same skills as the scientific method. Currently learning Unreal 5.1 and designing my own game. This is only some of what I know and do. But you know what, one day I had a problem that was going to take a day or to figure out, and a voice in my head said cut the yellow wire. It worked. Go figure. Thank you God! Another time I had a dream that this building was going to be destroyed in a storm while I was visiting Puerto Rico. 2 days later we were driving down the highway and I saw the building in my dream. My brother-in-law knew the building. It was under construction. It was going to be a massive church, and another building about creation science. We went into the building and I just happened to run into the owner who was a Pastor. I told him my dream and he blew me off, in a nice way. His ministry crashed because of a huge controversey and the construction stopped, then hurricane Maria destroyed the building. Go figure. I don't know why this happened to me, but it did. If someone told me this story 30 years ago, I would say they are nuts. Subjective? Yep. You have no position to try and make assumptions about me, you don't know anything about me and are a wrong for even trying. You can't even stay on topic, because you have an evil heart. All you care to do is attack people you don't even know, kind of resembles a child in kindergarten starting fights with the other children. That's what I see in the spiritual world. It's a good thing I have learned how not to be offended and could give 2 shits what you think. What you do to me is between God an you, God sees your behavior and understands why, and will judge you accordingly, so I will let God deal with you in His own way. The fiunniest part of all this is that you probably think that learning how not to offend someone has more value, yet all you do is try to offend me.Am I wrong, if I am, then I am still right.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
I was talking about science, you are talking about mathematics, what is your point?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
Yes I know.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
AZPaul3 writes: First faith = stupidity, not confidence. You are wrong. SYNONYMS FOR faith acceptancebelief confidence conviction hope loyalty truth trust allegiance assent assurance certainty certitude constancy credence credit credulity dependence faithfulness fealty fidelity reliance stock store sureness AZPaul3 writes: Faith is the emotional hope something will happen by wishful thinking regardless of reality That's your own self-serving definition.When the best hitter on the team goes up for the winning shot and his teammates say "I have faith in you" it is solely based on reality. AZPaul3 writes: I realize you have problems with the difference. You know the superiority of science over faith. I don't have problems at all. I have clearly stated that there are different levels of trust and faith. One can even say the faith I put in God is the same faith people put in science. There are many people who take drugs who have no idea how the science works, or who is presenting it. That is stupidity.
AZPaul3 writes: Your religion creates only war and bloodshed. Faith has yielded nothing but torture and pain. Russia. Men will be men. All the atheists in this forum who love to insult me, such as yourself instigate war on a daily basis. Don't feed me this bullshit.
AZPaul3 writes: Then you do not have evidence. Subjective is your emotional judgement, not reality. Your emotion has no force in this world and means nothing to the operations of the universe. That's right, Rat. Your emotions don't mean jack shit to this universe. Subjective means you have nothing. In my conversation with chat gtp it was made clear that subjective evidence IS evidence. I see lot's of things happening all the time, I can't prove them and neither can you. So your "emotions" mean as much as mine.
AZPaul3 writes: Of course I can. You are a religious nutjob. I do not follow any specific religion, but I do believe in God and if you don't you shouldn't be starting wars. My belief in God has nothing to do with the topic.
AZPaul3 writes: You are a religionist, Rat, and that means your intellect processing power, critical thinking skills and knowledge base are not just deficient but pose dangers to the rest of society. Atheist 'mega-churches' taking root across US | Fox News
AZPaul3 writes: You are an offensive person. You are a liar perpetrating your religion as an evil fantasy in the human psyche. History has shown your religious thought fosters nothing but schism, blood and torture for humanity. As a purveyor of religious stupidity you are an evil offensive person and should be treated as such. You don't know me, and stop pretending you do. It isn't very scientific of you. I have not intentionally offended anyone, and if you got offended it only proves my point that being taught how not to be offended has more value. Also thank you for proving my theory of demonization. You do not have the right to treat me anyway based on your subjective emotions. Your entire message 402 is nothing but subjective. you are just another hypocrite, I am sure you are proud. You don't possess the skills to debate me on the topic so you have to use liberal debate tactics to try and win some argument that has nothing to do with the topic. You don't even know how to follow forum guidelines, why should I think you know how science works, or if you understand the difference between being offended, and learning how not to be offended? Your posts do nothing to help society, you are the reason wars happen, not religion. Atheists churches are the evolution of the way men think, they inherently do not get along, and that is the reason for war. Not the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus, or God. Go take a look in the mirror, it says riVeRraT. I really hope your next post will logically explain why teaching people not to be offended has more value than teaching someone how not to be offended. If you can't do that, then stay out of it please.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
nwr writes: Scientists are mostly motivated by an intense curiosity. The rest who are probably in charge of say, health rules for the entire world, are mostly motivated by money.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
AZPaul3 writes: And since in science you receive the highest accolades for being right the scientist's biggest and best motivation is to be right. This is a troublesome definition. I guess there is science, and there is the scientific method. Their biggest motivation should be to have the scientific method work properly.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 416 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
ringo writes: Zero probability just means there is no evidence. If evidence is ever found, the probability would go up. We are way off topic. I would love to debate this, but I don't have a good understanding of it. My initial thought is if P(E)=0 both P and E would have to be zero. As soon as E has a value, then P must have a value. In other words if we dream something up like say teleportation, who is to say that one day it won't happen? Unless zero probability only represents present, and not future. If so, then it is not really applicable in determining if God exists or not. I also found this web-site, but don't understand all the math.Zero-probability events | They are not impossible Maybe make a separate thread about it?
ringo writes: You contradict yourself. You just said that zero probability would prove. You are correct. Thank you for pointing that out.
ringo writes: No such thing as "subjective evidence". It's right there in the word: evident. If it isn't evident to everybody, it isn't evidence. Yet the phrase exists, is used in science, and there is a legal definition for it. It's why I never say "God exists". I can only say I believe God exists. I also believe that God designed it that way. However, lot's of things in the bible are not subjective and can be evident to everyone. What does this have to do with learning how not to be offended?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024