Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Being offended.
Stile
Member
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


Message 182 of 444 (845868)
12-21-2018 1:42 PM
Reply to: Message 178 by Larni
12-21-2018 1:35 PM


Re: Respectful Offense
Hi Larni! Hope all's going well
Larni writes:
You never need to punish children when you can use negative reinforcement which gets better results.
...
It is literally inbuilt into human psychology that people respond better to negative reinforcement than punishment.
I have a quick question.
I don't have children (and, really, no plans to ever have children.)
Could you offer me a quick example so that I can understand your point better?
I can start one off:
Let's say we have a teenage daughter who, say... didn't clean her room.
What sort of response would be "negative reinforcement" vs. one that's a "punishment."
(To be clear... I'm not looking for a "correct response from a parent" ... just looking to identify the difference between the two categories.)
Would spanking her be a punishment?
Would sending her to her room be a punishment or negative reinforcement?
Would taking away her phone be a punishment or negative reinforcement?
Would have a "strong talk" with her be negative reinforcement?
It seems to me that, taken literally, all of those responses can fall into both categories.
I'm just wondering which is which and where the line is drawn (if it actually is a line, even...)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 178 by Larni, posted 12-21-2018 1:35 PM Larni has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 184 by Stile, posted 12-21-2018 2:15 PM Stile has seen this message but not replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


(1)
Message 184 of 444 (845873)
12-21-2018 2:15 PM
Reply to: Message 182 by Stile
12-21-2018 1:42 PM


Re: Respectful Offense
Huh... I tried to look it up on my own and it is a very subtle concept (if what I was looking at is even accurate):
Positive/Negative Reinforcement and Positive/Negative Punishment
After reading this, my guess is:
Example (again) - A teenage girl does not clean her room.
Saying "I'm going to take your phone away for the rest of the day because you didn't clean your room." and taking her phone away - negative punishment.
Saying "You can have your phone back after you clean your room." and taking her phone away - negative reinforcement.
The difference is that with the punishment - the child only has to "survive" the punishment in order to return to normal.
However, with the reinforcement - the child only has to "perform the desired duty" in order to return to normal.
I think I can understand that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 182 by Stile, posted 12-21-2018 1:42 PM Stile has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 188 by Percy, posted 12-21-2018 5:06 PM Stile has seen this message but not replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


Message 186 of 444 (845876)
12-21-2018 2:40 PM
Reply to: Message 185 by Tangle
12-21-2018 2:23 PM


Tangle writes:
This could have been an interesting discussion if the extreemist Christians hadn't made a bloody shambles of the argument, one by being illiterately vague the other by ranting yet again about gays and Muslims.
Absolutely.
There's lots to said for public movements as well.
Like the #MeToo movement.
-A greatly needed movement that is incredibly important in moving society closer to one where "all people" are treated equally.
-But certain minor... enthusiastic... pushers of this group use it to see if they can "cause a big reaction (like loss of a job)" where none (or possibly only a much weaker reaction) is required.
Such over-bearing 'headline-seekers' seem to exist for a lot of significant movements.
I think they are partly a necessity in attempting to "find where the line should really be" and also helpful in reminding us all to use our reason and thinking-caps whenever a situation arises. Blind-responses are rarely a good thing, regardless of the cause they are attached to.
And, of course, the system of respecting-others that already exists already covers how to deal with such things.
Some group abusing a movement one way or another?
It's quite possible (and easy) to not-respect this particular group while still fully-respecting the movement as a whole - or any other group that's actually using the movement to do what the movement should be doing.
It all usually ends up about right in the end.
But it wouldn't hurt to have a public reminder every now and then to think before we jump to a conclusion.
The media has a tough-hand to play in this regard... What do they report? When do they report? How should it be reported?
And it's also easy for advertising/personal usage payments to go towards the ones who handle it well, and shy away from those who handle it poorly.
Self-correcting, again. I just sometimes wish it was faster

This message is a reply to:
 Message 185 by Tangle, posted 12-21-2018 2:23 PM Tangle has not replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


Message 209 of 444 (846141)
12-30-2018 11:03 AM
Reply to: Message 193 by riVeRraT
12-21-2018 6:40 PM


Re: No one?
riVeRraT writes:
It's becoming more and more of a conversation. This is NBC...
Converstations are good, aren't they?
You're not trying to prevent conversations as a way to "protect free speech," are you?
Again, it seems like you may be getting offended a bit too easily.
Let me know when we get the point of attempting to implement legislation... which was the silly claim I was talking about.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 193 by riVeRraT, posted 12-21-2018 6:40 PM riVeRraT has not replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


Message 210 of 444 (846142)
12-30-2018 11:08 AM
Reply to: Message 194 by riVeRraT
12-21-2018 6:46 PM


Re: No one?
riVeRraT writes:
Stile writes:
Is this claim about PC-legislation on the same level of flat-earther attempts?
Or is it something more serious?
We can't further this discussion unless riVeRraT provides something more than his claims.
It's 150 posts in and he's provided nothing so far. Is this because he has nothing? Or is this just because he's busy or hadn't had time yet, or doesn't understand that others can't read his mind and need him to explain himself instead of expecting everyone to agree with his "so obvious facts?"
...
I guess Antifa smashing heads in the street over "hate speech" or "white supremacists marches" don't qualify as meat? When was the last time we even saw a white supremacists march? Wtf?
150 posts and I have nothing? You have your head in the sand bro?
Yes, nothing.
Antifa smashing heads over "hate speech" is something despised by everyone.
There is no legislation being introduced in order to allow Antifa to smash heads.
This is not meat in defense of any claim about PC-legislation being anything more than on the level of flat-earther attempts.
200 posts now, and still nothing.
Do you actually have anything to back up this claim about PC-legislation? Or do you just have nothing?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 194 by riVeRraT, posted 12-21-2018 6:46 PM riVeRraT has not replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


(1)
Message 211 of 444 (846143)
12-30-2018 11:17 AM
Reply to: Message 200 by riVeRraT
12-22-2018 3:26 PM


Re: Respectful Offense
riVeRraT writes:
What does any of this have to do with the idea of teaching people not to be offended is better?
It shows that such an idea is already taught and no changes are necessary.
Are you so in the dark that you don't see what is happening everyday?
That is my question for you to answer.
I have backed up everything I've claimed.
You have not.
riVeRraT writes:
Stile writes:
Any example we can look at to see if it has factual foundation or not? (about something that "shows what riVeRraT is trying to talk about in regards to people needing to not-be-offended over PC language")
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.
I'm asking you to show us some meat because you seem to be unable to do so.
You've brought up a few horrific ideas - but we all agree that they are terrible and should be fought against and don't seem to have much to do with PC language.
So I keep asking... do you have anything that actually backs up the point you're trying to make?
Or maybe you don't actually know what point you're trying to make?
Maybe you just want to yell out about this or that for a little and make yourself feel better?
I hope you got your frustrations out.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 200 by riVeRraT, posted 12-22-2018 3:26 PM riVeRraT has not replied

  
Stile
Member
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


(1)
Message 383 of 444 (905753)
02-03-2023 8:45 AM
Reply to: Message 382 by riVeRraT
02-02-2023 8:42 PM


You got "got" by ChatGTP. It moved the goalposts on you and you saw what you wanted to see.
First question: "Is there more value in teaching how not to be offended than teaching how not to offend?"
Final answer: " 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."
Notice how your original question doesn't have the word "easily" on one side of the fence.
But, ChatGTP sneaks this in on only one side of the fence in order to appease your insistence.
And, of course, everyone agrees that people should not be "easily" offended.
No one has ever argued otherwise.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 382 by riVeRraT, posted 02-02-2023 8:42 PM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 384 by riVeRraT, posted 02-03-2023 10:36 AM Stile has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024