NationStates Jolt Archive

No. Being adamantly absolute in any point of view is a sign of stupidity and ignorance. So its good that you can admit you agree with him on something even though you don't like the majority of his opinions

I've been thinking about this for a while now. More and more it seems that debate and discussions have become shouting matches and 3rd grade playground insults.

What I'm curious about now, which of you can remember the last time that your opinion has been changed by an argument from the "other" side?

Or at least which of you can admit you have had your opinion changed?

Myself, my mind has been changed on the issue of gay marriage. Originally I was opposed to it. I could have, and still could point to studies about child raising, traditional marriage etc. ad nauseum. Now however I have come to realize that among other things, being raised by 2 loving parents is better than being raised by 1. Other arguments have influenced me as well, and I need not go into it all here.

Sufice to say, I admit my earlier position was wrong and now I support gay marriages.

It was this morning. I suddenly realised that chocolate is not good.

I change my mind all the time. Not so much on politics, but rather often on philosophy. Rarely is it that someone else can convince me; typically, I convince myself in the endless argumentation that goes on in my brain.

I've been thinking about this for a while now. More and more it seems that debate and discussions have become shouting matches and 3rd grade playground insults.

What I'm curious about now, which of you can remember the last time that your opinion has been changed by an argument from the "other" side?

Or at least which of you can admit you have had your opinion changed?

Myself, my mind has been changed on the issue of gay marriage. Originally I was opposed to it. I could have, and still could point to studies about child raising, traditional marriage etc. ad nauseum. Now however I have come to realize that among other things, being raised by 2 loving parents is better than being raised by 1. Other arguments have influenced me as well, and I need not go into it all here.

Sufice to say, I admit my earlier position was wrong and now I support gay marriages.
...wait, you actually saw reason on that issue? I don't know you, but that is incredible! It's rare--in my experience--for anyone who does not support gay marriage to change their mind.

As for me, I change my mind whenever I recieve new information on a subject, as any scientist would. While I do not intend to pursue a scientific career, I go about everything scientifically. As such, my mind also operates like science: change when new information is recieved.

I've been thinking about this for a while now. More and more it seems that debate and discussions have become shouting matches and 3rd grade playground insults.

What I'm curious about now, which of you can remember the last time that your opinion has been changed by an argument from the "other" side?

Or at least which of you can admit you have had your opinion changed?

Myself, my mind has been changed on the issue of gay marriage. Originally I was opposed to it. I could have, and still could point to studies about child raising, traditional marriage etc. ad nauseum. Now however I have come to realize that among other things, being raised by 2 loving parents is better than being raised by 1. Other arguments have influenced me as well, and I need not go into it all here.

Sufice to say, I admit my earlier position was wrong and now I support gay marriages.

I suppose from the topic that you're talking about political issues and not things like where I'm going to eat dinner.

In that case, then yes. I have changed my mind about the very thing you did. I don't like the idea of being gay. I'm am not myself, and I still don't agree with giving them extra benefits or the ability to raise children. But if they get married, what is that honestly hurting? Someone who I respect asked me that once...and I spent a week thinking and arguing with him about it. By the end, I realized that I wasn't hurting anything, and that, above all, the government had more important issues to address.

Now...on another note...I think you're a jackass. Two parents are better than one, eh? I was raised in a single parent house, only seeing my father every other weekened. While I have no doubt that both loved me, my mother was far more direct in her parenting since she was the one raising me day to day. Are you trying to tell me that I am somehow worse off because of it? Are you trying to tell me that I'd be better off with two fathers, and carry the weight of the enormous social stigma with me throughout my lives because my gay parents were only thinking of themselves when they adopted me and not how the world would treat me?

I struggle to see how that would be the case.

I change my mind all the time ... every day ... without a moment's notice.

I change my mind all the time. Not so much on politics, but rather often on philosophy. Rarely is it that someone else can convince me; typically, I convince myself in the endless argumentation that goes on in my brain.

I hear you and concur!

No, though that's more likely due to my rampant recreational drug use than to inflexibility. That, and I've yet to hear good enough reasons to turn tail on my beliefs.

I've yet to hear good enough reasons to turn tail on my beliefs.

^ That's pretty much the big one.

Are you trying to tell me that I'd be better off with two fathers, and carry the weight of the enormous social stigma with me throughout my lives because my gay parents were only thinking of themselves when they adopted me and not how the world would treat me?
Hold the phone. What did you just say? "They were only thinking of themselves"? What the hell, man? Since when do people adopt for themselves and not the kids? I've yet to meet a single person who has ever adopted that didn't care much more about the kids well-being than they did for any possible selfish desire. Why would gay parents be any different?

Now...on another note...I think you're a jackass. Two parents are better than one, eh? I was raised in a single parent house, only seeing my father every other weekened. While I have no doubt that both loved me, my mother was far more direct in her parenting since she was the one raising me day to day. Are you trying to tell me that I am somehow worse off because of it? Are you trying to tell me that I'd be better off with two fathers, and carry the weight of the enormous social stigma with me throughout my lives because my gay parents were only thinking of themselves when they adopted me and not how the world would treat me?

I struggle to see how that would be the case.
This is kinda my point. Starting off the subject with an insult... hardly the way to make your point.

In what way did I disparage a single parent home? You are too quick to judge. I simply made the observation that 2 loving parents are better than 1. I honestly don't think that a gay couple, who wish to adopt/raise a child are not doing so for selfish reasons. Raising a child is one of the most selfless jobs there is. I applaud any couple, gay or strait, for willing to do that. Particularly if they adopt.

Oh, no, no, n-yes.

I change my mind whenever it is the logical thing to do. Whenever new information is presented it, along with all previous info on the subject is scanned to see if a change of opinion is in order.

Although I must say that it has been some time since I've needed to do so. It may have something to do with the fact that the last discussion I was in/am currently in was one in which the guy wanted to ban the gay pride parade and all forms of public displays (be it of affection or otherwise). Although the chances were slim in his changing my mind in the beginning (my whole moral thing was making my position lead by a mile over the other option) I was willing to change if the proper info was presented. Instead he reverted to bashing gays and making generalizations about the people in the forumn who disagreed with him. (I believe the last thing he said was something about us all being hippies without jobs who contribute nothing to society)

Anyways, back on track. If you give me a sound, logical argument then you can change my mind. But simply stating opinions will not have any effect as they can not be taken as an objective piece of data.

Oh, no, no, n-yes.
Ainsworth: Shut up. Now look, have you or have you not got his leg?

Rear end: Yes.

Front end: No. No no no.

Both: No no no no no no. Nope. No.

Ainsworth: Why did you say 'yes'?

Front end: I didn't.

I love that movie :)

^ That's pretty much the big one.
What can I say? I listen, and I just don't hear those faerie bells ringing in my ears. No sale.

I'll still listen, just don't try foisting the same crap on me all the time. No means no.

Changed my mind? All the time.

I went through three religions before finally decided to not only stick with, but become a minister, in the current one. (And I didn't jump denominations, but from monotheism, to antitheism, to polytheism).

Politically, I was raised conservatively, then went to so far left that it was funny, and now am moderate. (Can you be very moderate? If so then I'm that.)

I also jumped back and forth about gay marriage, finally deciding on I so no harm in it.

The only political issue I can think I've never wavered on is abortion. I would never have one and am morally against it, but that doesn't mean it should be illegal just because I don't like it. Like all moral decisions, I beleive it's up to the individual to choose what they beleive is the moral choice.

Sweet Gods! I hope this doesn't start an abortion debate. Those can get ugly.

This is kinda my point. Starting off the subject with an insult... hardly the way to make your point.

In what way did I disparage a single parent home? You are too quick to judge. I simply made the observation that 2 loving parents are better than 1. I honestly don't think that a gay couple, who wish to adopt/raise a child are not doing so for selfish reasons. Raising a child is one of the most selfless jobs there is. I applaud any couple, gay or strait, for willing to do that. Particularly if they adopt.
You know what? You're an ass and I hate you and you should just go burn in hell!

Now, how many of you would honestly take anything I have to say seriously after that? Epsilon Squadron is 100% correct. I could have the answer to the ultimate question of life, the universe, and everything posted here and it wouldn't make a difference after the first line. (The answer is 42, BTW)

If you want to change someone's mind you only need to remain calm, and present arguments clearly and logically. Of course this won't always work because some people aren't willing to listen to logic, but you have a better chance if you don't resort to foolish insults and rhetoric.

(I wonder how many people are going to read the first line, stop, and then tell me that I should stop hurling insults.)

I've been thinking about this for a while now. More and more it seems that debate and discussions have become shouting matches and 3rd grade playground insults.

What I'm curious about now, which of you can remember the last time that your opinion has been changed by an argument from the "other" side?

Or at least which of you can admit you have had your opinion changed?

Myself, my mind has been changed on the issue of gay marriage. Originally I was opposed to it. I could have, and still could point to studies about child raising, traditional marriage etc. ad nauseum. Now however I have come to realize that among other things, being raised by 2 loving parents is better than being raised by 1. Other arguments have influenced me as well, and I need not go into it all here.

Sufice to say, I admit my earlier position was wrong and now I support gay marriages.

Hmmm. I was discussing something with a friend a couple weeks ago and she made a great argument, so I said "fair enough" and rescinded my earlier position. The subject is not really something I feel comfortable posting here for reasons of confidentiality and privacy, but oh well.

I love that movie :)
Ainsworth: Now look...

Rear end: All right, all right. we are dressed as a tiger because
he had an auntie who did it in 1839 and this is the fiftieth
anniversary.

Front end: No. We're doing it for a bet.

Rear end: God told us to do it.

Front end: To tell the truth, we are completely mad. we are inmates
of a Bengali psychiatric institution and we escaped by making
this skin out of old cereal packets...


I love the penis shanty and, the fish, and of course, the mint.

I love the penis shanty and, the fish, and of course, the mint.
OF that skit I like the bikeshop in cairo part lol

I love the penis shanty and, the fish, and of course, the mint.
http://www.sk.co.yu/1998/05/siop05.jpg
http://www.mutantreviewers.com/rmeaning2.jpg

But Seriously guys, getting off topic here.

OF that skit I like the bikeshop in cairo part lol
Well, speaking of bikes ... presenting, Mr. F.G. Superman!

Mr. Creosote was pure Terry Jones. Though I always loved him as...

- The BISHOP!

http://www.sk.co.yu/1998/05/siop05.jpg
http://www.mutantreviewers.com/rmeaning2.jpg

But Seriously guys, getting off topic here.
Two peculiarities - one, i actually started it for Verdigroth's sake, since his connex went weird on him (he was just over here) - and of course, he's a man of the world ...
and two, i encountered this unusual entity on the Bush <==> Hitler thread who expressed things as though they figured they were taking me to task, and it crossed my mind that i will occasionally behave as though someone has taken me behind the ol' woodshed, just to keep in their assumptive graces long enough for another good shot - kinda like passive/aggressive, but deliberate and subterfuge-ish.
As for changing my mind - i actually have to have my mind made up about something to do that. Not very often in either case.

Mr. Creosote was pure Terry Jones. Though I always loved him as...

- The BISHOP!
Did you see his "Medieval Lives" series? I think i taped every one. Strangely enough, that topic came up IRL conversation today. *shrug*

Okay, guys if you want to discuss Monty Python I suggest you create a forumn for it.
Right now you're hijacking this one and evading the original point.

Oh, this is great - my personalized internet radio station just started playing the title song for "The Meaning of Life".

*edit: sorry, sorry...

Okay, guys if you want to discuss Monty Python I suggest you create a forumn for it.
Right now you're hijacking this one and evading the original point.
Actually, i posted this ...
i encountered this unusual entity on the Bush <==> Hitler thread who expressed things as though they figured they were taking me to task, and it crossed my mind that i will occasionally behave as though someone has taken me behind the ol' woodshed, just to keep in their assumptive graces long enough for another good shot - kinda like passive/aggressive, but deliberate and subterfuge-ish.
As for changing my mind - i actually have to have my mind made up about something to do that. Not very often in either case.
here ...
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10954549&postcount=24

Unless there was another point ... i'll flip through a little bit more.
I will say that a lot of times where an issue about changing my mind only comes up when there is useful, relevant information that i can deal with in a challenge, since i have one of those kinds of personalities that strives ever so to understand a lot of things as much as i can, i will change it based on useful, testable information.
My relations online are a play, though - and some interesting discussion shifts with Corneliu accentuated that quite nicely at one point.

Here's a linkie you might like for later, btw ...

http://ghettobaby.net/Emoticons/linkedtocdixon061504changelinks/threadhijacked.gif

Sarkhaan, Ladamesansmerci and i's most relevant smilie.

Oh, this is great - my personalized internet radio station just started playing the title song for "The Meaning of Life".

*edit: sorry, sorry...
The Slack Plane seems tilted quite well in your flavour.
So does this challenge your first page assessment?

Oh, this is great - my personalized internet radio station just started playing the title song for "The Meaning of Life".
ARGG!! *pulls hair* I give up! This thread had so much potential, but now... *runs away chanting incoherant nonsense about a hijacking* :headbang: :headbang: :headbang:

EDIT: http://ghettobaby.net/Emoticons/linkedtocdixon061504changelinks/threadhijacked.gif
I like. And sorry Straughn, I wasn't talking about you, at least not about that one post.

ARGG!! *pulls hair* I give up! This thread had so much potential, but now... *runs away chanting incoherant nonsense about a hijacking* :headbang: :headbang: :headbang:

Perhaps we should attack the hijackers and crash-land in Pennsylvania?

The Slack Plane seems tilted quite well in your flavour.
So does this challenge your first page assessment?
Not really, no.

Though I'm definitely cruising the luck-plane tonight!

Perhaps we should attack the hijackers and crash-land in Pennsylvania?
I'm putting the boxcutter down. Honestly, there were some boxes in First Class that needed to be opened. Just ask the Wright Bros. They'll vouch for me.

Perhaps we should attack the hijackers and crash-land in Pennsylvania?
Umm... I'm not going to touch that with a 10 foot pole. To sensitive a subject for some still.

Umm... I'm not going to touch that with a 10 foot pole. To sensitive a subject for some still.

I can respect that. It's a sensitive subject for me too. I'm just one of those people that can quite literally find the humor in anything.

I change my mind whenever it is the logical thing to do. Whenever new information is presented it, along with all previous info on the subject is scanned to see if a change of opinion is in order.Sounds kind of like what i wrote.


Although I must say that it has been some time since I've needed to do so. It may have something to do with the fact that the last discussion I was in/am currently in was one in which the guy wanted to ban the gay pride parade and all forms of public displays (be it of affection or otherwise). Although the chances were slim in his changing my mind in the beginning (my whole moral thing was making my position lead by a mile over the other option) I was willing to change if the proper info was presented. Instead he reverted to bashing gays and making generalizations about the people in the forumn who disagreed with him. (I believe the last thing he said was something about us all being hippies without jobs who contribute nothing to society)Sounds like Yarvolk to me. Perhaps you've dealt with him/her.

Anyways, back on track. If you give me a sound, logical argument then you can change my mind. But simply stating opinions will not have any effect as they can not be taken as an objective piece of data.There are occasions where the logic of the argument will take you more than one direction, and the consistency of the data will be the kind of thing people may use to further their arguments that don't necessarily agree.

Not really, no.

Though I'm definitely cruising the luck-plane tonight!
RAmen to that.

There are occasions where the logic of the argument will take you more than one direction, and the consistency of the data will be the kind of thing people may use to further their arguments that don't necessarily agree.
True enough, which is one of the reasons that you have to weigh the given data based on how reliable the source is, and on how frequently it appears in reputable locations

EDIT: And that is one of the problems with using logic. Unfortunately it can often be used to support any argument. But it is one of the shortcomings that I've had to accept in using it. If there is a better way let me know so I can adopt it.

i can remember the last time i chainged my body. does that count?

and no i don't mean surgicly.

=^^=
.../\...

I can respect that. It's a sensitive subject for me too. I'm just one of those people that can quite literally find the humor in anything.
Oh I see the humor, and it isn't really sensitive for me (after 5 years I don't feel the sting since no one I knew was anywhere near any of those events), but I know some people have real problems still, sometimes breaking into tears. So I usually restrict my comments regarding it just in case.

I still applaud those people. They showed real courage and honor in bringing down that plane. I salute them.

I still applaud those people. They showed real courage and honor in bringing down that plane. I salute them.

As do I.

i can remember the last time i chainged my body. does that count?

and no i don't mean surgicly.

=^^=
.../\...
Do you travel in a blue box with a flashing light on top?

True enough, which is one of the reasons that you have to weigh the given data based on how reliable the source is, and on how frequently it appears in reputable locations
Indeed. The nature of most of my posts involves a current issue of contention (for which there are quite a few references usually) so i can often have links and such and the person can deal with where those take them.
The other ones are usually of an abstract/irreverent nature (while remaining true to that philosophy in a strict sense :confused: ) and usually it takes a lot of explanation or something of the like to make it worthwhile to people who don't already know what i'm talking about. Take, for example, UpwardThrust running with Nudge Nudge. That exploded. I should, i suppose, be more careful of that particular nature of reference, for obvious reasons, but i have a loose philosophical principle of commerce that says i can basically summate just about anything in conversation with Star Trek, Futurama, The Simpsons, Steven Wright, Monty Python, and MXC.
Occasionally i go outside those parameters, but not often enough to ... well, change my mind ;).

The other ones are usually of an abstract/irreverent nature (while remaining true to that philosophy in a strict sense :confused: ) and usually it takes a lot of explanation or something of the like to make it worthwhile to people who don't already know what i'm talking about. Take, for example, UpwardThrust running with Nudge Nudge. That exploded. I should, i suppose, be more careful of that particular nature of reference, for obvious reasons, but i have a loose philosophical principle of commerce that says i can basically summate just about anything in conversation with Star Trek, Futurama, The Simpsons, Steven Wright, Monty Python, and MXC.
Occasionally i go outside those parameters, but not often enough to ... well, change my mind ;).
I understand Futurama, Star Trek (You can probably guess I use this one quite a bit), Monty Python, The Simpsons, and Steven Wright, but what comes from MXC that is of use? I don't think I've ever seen an opportunity to incorporate it into a debate.

but what comes from MXC that is of use? I don't think I've ever seen an opportunity to incorporate it into a debate.Indeed, that would be a more abstract reference, but as a conveyence more than an axiom. However, the writers are absolutely f*cking brilliant on that show, so i'm pretty sure i can ref some quality material from it. Obviously the visual is good enough, but what made me actually bother to watch it was the "Meat Packers" episode, as i had been flipping through channels and only barely heard an entendre, and flipped back, and the show had me laughing so hard i was crying in 2 minutes. Something like that shouldn't slip into obscurity ...
As for debate material, well, that's where the challenge lies. I was Guy Le Douche last year for Halloween - and i hammed it up in character and almost got my jimmy up my gullet for it from a friend whom i thought would have recognized me. Sweet.
Admittedly, it's tough for me to find the best jokes online so far. But eventually i'll get 'em, even if i have to type them out m'self.

As of a few weeks ago, I thought that the "right to bear arms" (as seen in the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution) refers to a "collective" rather than an individual right. In fact, I argued just this point on NS.

I have since decided that there is an individual right to keep and bear arms, although I maintain that it has no direct relation to any "right" to revolt against unjust government. (Which means it still allows strict limits on the varieties of arms an individual may possess, as well as the circumstances and manner in which arms may be carried.) Rather, the right derives from the unalienable right of self-defense: while political communities rightly replace private retribution with public justice, they may not legitimately deprive individuals of reasonable means to defend themselves and their families from attack, and their homes from illegal invasion.

I've been thinking about this for a while now. More and more it seems that debate and discussions have become shouting matches and 3rd grade playground insults.

What I'm curious about now, which of you can remember the last time that your opinion has been changed by an argument from the "other" side?


funny that. I am more tolerant of the ACLU because Cat Tribe calmly provided information that I was not privy to.

however, on Gay marriage. I was on the fence. neither supporting nor against it.

however, due to Lyric's ranting about how it's "if you're not for, you're against it". I can now say that Lyric's convinced me to be against it. I'm just not vocal about it.

however, due to Lyric's ranting about how it's "if you're not for, you're against it". I can now say that Lyric's convinced me to be against it. I'm just not vocal about it.
Every nation in every region now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists.
-9/20/01
:(

-9/20/01
:(
Every nation in every region now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. ahhh.. but for that I was for the US.

so no problems there.

besides the delivery of GW Bush was kinder and more tactful than Lyrics was.

ahhh.. but for that I was for the US.Of course, you didn't want to get labeled a terrorist. Probably even steered clear of public rallies over ANYTHING for the same reason ... Go figure. :(
And so it was written that the bloated corpse of McCarthy again steered rein in the keeled turbulence that was the United States of America.

so no problems there.Oh that indeed is a POV.

besides the delivery of GW Bush was kinder and more tactful than Lyrics was.I can't believe you didn't follow through! You set up - and dubbed! How could you do that? It wrote itself! :confused:

Of course, you didn't want to get labeled a terrorist. Probably even steered clear of public rallies over ANYTHING for the same reason ... Go figure. :(
And so it was written that the bloated corpse of McCarthy again steered rein in the keeled turbulence that was the United States of America.

Oh that indeed is a POV.
yup, and while I respect your POV (and I do) I ask that you respect mine.
I can't believe you didn't follow through! You set up - and dubbed! How could you do that? It wrote itself! :confused:because Lyric pissed me off with what she said. normally others wouldn't have, but Lyric did. it completely turned me away from ever agreeing with any of her points. Lyric was the only poster that I ever seriously considered putting on my Ignore list. not something I am proud to admit.

sorry, normally I would be humorous about it but not at this moment. :(

yup, and while I respect your POV (and I do) I ask that you respect mine.
A lot of people thought at first that he meant to do the right thing, because anything else would be despicable. It's understandable.

because Lyric pissed me off with what she said. normally others wouldn't have, but Lyric did. it completely turned me away from ever agreeing with any of her points. Lyric was the only poster that I ever seriously considered putting on my Ignore list. not something I am proud to admit.

sorry, normally I would be humorous about it but not at this moment. :(
Well i can understand that. I didn't read what Lyric said so i'm only taking from your experience.
A question though - what if she were to post something that was the same as your thinking - would you just not reply or share in her public view? Or is it a matter of deliberate personal antagonism on her part? A lot of posters get tags but few, i think, really make lasting enemies (even though some issues really bring that jazz out). And then, of course, there's the iconoclasts like Corneliu, who, IMNSHO, seem never to be able to argue on any thread of any kind without having loads of people gang-probe him sideways until the thread goes lackluster, dank and flaccid. That's why i call him "Lightning Rod".

Well i can understand that. I didn't read what Lyric said so i'm only taking from your experience.
A question though - what if she were to post something that was the same as your thinking - would you just not reply or share in her public view? Or is it a matter of deliberate personal antagonism on her part? A lot of posters get tags but few, i think, really make lasting enemies (even though some issues really bring that jazz out). And then, of course, there's the iconoclasts like Corneliu, who, IMNSHO, seem never to be able to argue on any thread of any kind without having loads of people gang-probe him sideways until the thread goes lackluster, dank and flaccid. That's why i call him "Lightning Rod".if Lyric were to post the same viewpoint in the same tone... I would do what I did for all others who did that. caution them about their emotions running away with them, get them to calm down... and when all else fails... back away and let that person become the Primary target. it has happened before.

sorry, but for some reason... Lyric still makes my blood boil and I would rather think happy thought since it's nearing midnight here. can I request to drop the subject of Lyric?

if Lyric were to post the same viewpoint in the same tone... I would do what I did for all others who did that. caution them about their emotions running away with them, get them to calm down... and when all else fails... back away and let that person become the Primary target. it has happened before. That does happen a lot here. I occasionally make a good target for someone, but i find that there isn't ANYONE on here (that's stuck around, anyway) who i couldn't find something to appreciate about them.
Usually my first interactions are quite polar in nature, and often on other threads, i will find that the first issue i'd responded to was indicative of other traits expressed through different issues. I have, however, seen completely opposite behaviour for other topics than i expected, and in some cases i don't even remember being much of an arsehole to someone (although admittedly i am). Perhaps in that fashion i may change my mind - i did with "Lightning Rod" for example, because of ONE specific response s/he had to something i said, which told me pretty clearly that they had some subtle character qualities that i could respect, and from that point, i've opted to change my behaviour and consideration of their posts and intent (observed, anyway).

sorry, but for some reason... Lyric still makes my blood boil and I would rather think happy thought since it's nearing midnight here. can I request to drop the subject of Lyric?
Sure. No reason not to, i guess.

I very seldom chamge my mind on an issue suddenly. it usually takes some time and is done by degrees.
At one point I was four square against any and all affirmative action programs. I felt it was transparently obvious that these programs were counterproductive to equality and needlessly devisive and incindiary
I would not have suddenly reversed my opinion on the basis of a single argument. No matter how compelling the argument was nor how engaging or well written it was.
However my opinion has softened somewhat over the years. I now think that a very limited (in scope and duration) affirmative action program can help achieve the desired result of leveling an eneven economic playing field. I still consider this an extreme last ditch method, and one which is easily abused. However if it is used sparingly and only when needed not just when it is handy or popular it can provide good results.


My view changed from ( I was going to say "a black and white one" here then thought better of it) one of hardline every-citizen-is-equal-in-the-eye-of-the-law-and-the-government to a view that sometimes it is worthwhile to very temporarily make some citizens more equal than others.

My opinion changed slowly over time. I grudgingly came to see some gray areas. Even though many affirmative action programs have been catastrophic examples of how to make socioeconomic troubles larger, a few have actually worked well. On those rare occasions when a gummint social program actually improves a bad situation rather than expanding it I tend to approve.

So there you have it, my opinion changed over time because I began to look at the issue from different angles and because I saw some good end results of using a program which I was against.

Not since I realised (or thought I did, I may have been wrong) I could never fully logically justify any belief, and hence arguing was just for fun.:D

Sarkhaan, Ladamesansmerci and i's most relevant smilie.
Oh my. I feel so honoured! Thank ye. :fluffle:

Last time I changed my opinion on something was on prostitution laws. Maybe drug laws too, but I'm still teetering between pro and con concerning those things.

http://ghettobaby.net/Emoticons/linkedtocdixon061504changelinks/threadhijacked.gif

Sarkhaan, Ladamesansmerci and i's most relevant smilie.

Oh comon! Lady Lisa doesn't always do it alone you know! I bet i'm just the Knight of Dioxide to you :p.

Oh my. I feel so honoured! Thank ye. :fluffle:
Absotively. http://www.websmileys.com/sm/crazy/hug_tweetz.gif

So are you gonna give a medical anecdote on my new thread? Apparently, only Ill Rufferto got the idea :eek: :eek:

Funny, your sig said "Tweety-ish?"

Last time I changed my opinion on something was on prostitution laws. Maybe drug laws too, but I'm still teetering between pro and con concerning those things.
Experience is the best mentor in those matter, IMNSHO. ;)

Oh comon! Lady Lisa doesn't always do it alone you know! I bet i'm just the Knight of Dioxide to you :p.
Ah, you are SO RIGHT!
*places another brick of shame 'twixt his shoulder blades*

BTW, on my siglist.

Experience is the best mentor in those matter, IMNSHO. ;)
Or no. TG has been sent IMHOBTWFYI

Absotively. http://www.websmileys.com/sm/crazy/hug_tweetz.gif

So are you gonna give a medical anecdote on my new thread? Apparently, only Ill Rufferto got the idea :eek: :eek:

Funny, your sig said "Tweety-ish?"
I will join your thread if you chance the topic. I've been so healthy my entire life I really can't think of anything wrong medically other than a couple of colds.

does this sig suit your liking more?

Or no. TG has been sent IMHOBTWFYI
Yay!
*another brick in the wall*
;)

I will join your thread if you chance the topic. I've been so healthy my entire life I really can't think of anything wrong medically other than a couple of colds.

does this sig suit your liking more?
I didn't dislike the first one, but the new one works just fine!
I was referring to the smilie link. :)

Ah, you are SO RIGHT!
*places another brick of shame 'twixt his shoulder blades*

BTW, on my siglist.

I was expecting that :p It sounded too cool tah' pass up.

i wasn't going to click on this thread but then i did.

note: i'm sure someone's done this already but i couldn't resist.

I've been thinking about this for a while now. More and more it seems that debate and discussions have become shouting matches and 3rd grade playground insults.

What I'm curious about now, which of you can remember the last time that your opinion has been changed by an argument from the "other" side?

Or at least which of you can admit you have had your opinion changed?

Myself, my mind has been changed on the issue of gay marriage. Originally I was opposed to it. I could have, and still could point to studies about child raising, traditional marriage etc. ad nauseum. Now however I have come to realize that among other things, being raised by 2 loving parents is better than being raised by 1. Other arguments have influenced me as well, and I need not go into it all here.

Sufice to say, I admit my earlier position was wrong and now I support gay marriages.
Yeah, some posts have recently made my opinions change.

Yesterday. No, today. No....

aw, skip it.

Yesterday. No, today. No....

aw, skip it.
"The other day I was ... no wait, that wasn't me." -Steven Wright :)

I've been thinking about this for a while now. More and more it seems that debate and discussions have become shouting matches and 3rd grade playground insults.

What I'm curious about now, which of you can remember the last time that your opinion has been changed by an argument from the "other" side?

Or at least which of you can admit you have had your opinion changed?

Myself, my mind has been changed on the issue of gay marriage. Originally I was opposed to it. I could have, and still could point to studies about child raising, traditional marriage etc. ad nauseum. Now however I have come to realize that among other things, being raised by 2 loving parents is better than being raised by 1. Other arguments have influenced me as well, and I need not go into it all here.

Sufice to say, I admit my earlier position was wrong and now I support gay marriages.

Online? Rarely.
I can name the people who have, with providing good sources for their facts, clear debating and not arguing.
As far as here goes, 99% of the people who believe they make a good arguement are just spouting fallacies.

Pants pissing feet stompers.
Doesnt change my mind, most here are more concerned with being "right" as opposed to sharing opinions and exchanging ideas.

How often is my mind changed in general throughout life?

Constantly, this of course is further proof the young know nothing, because over the course of many years your opinions will change and shift as refine your person.

I find my opinion can be swayed almost daily by an event or a good point.

I have had people make simple observations which profoundly altered my opinion.

But who cares, my opinion of my opinion might be differen tommorow.

Somebody made me realize that it was silly to get worked up about the ports thing.

Yesterday. No, today. No....

aw, skip it.
Put some effort into it!

Online? Rarely.
I can name the people who have, with providing good sources for their facts, clear debating and not arguing.
As far as here goes, 99% of the people who believe they make a good arguement are just spouting fallacies.

Pants pissing feet stompers.
Doesnt change my mind, most here are more concerned with being "right" as opposed to sharing opinions and exchanging ideas.

Hmmm ...
*eyes Yarvolk accusingly*

"In the case of any person whose judgment is really deserving of confidence, how has it become so? Because he has kept his mind open to criticism of his opinions and conduct. Because it has been his practice to listen to all that could be said against him; to profit by as much of it as was just, and expound to himself, and upon occasion to others, the fallacy of what was fallacious. Because he has felt, that the only way in which a human being can make some approach to knowing the whole of a subject, is by hearing what can be said about it by persons of every variety of opinion, and studying all modes in which it can be looked at by every character of mind. No wise man ever acquired his wisdom in any mode but this; nor is it in the nature of human intellect to become wise in any other manner."
-- On Liberty by John Stuart Mill

"Now modern criticism has shown that in a conflict of this kind the truth is not to be found by excluding one of the opposite terms, but only by reconciling them. It is, I repeat, a known scientific fact that all antagonisms, whether in nature or in ideas, become resolved in a more general term or complex formula which reconciles the opposing sides by, so to speak, assimilating them both. Could not we therefore, who are men of common sense, while we are awaiting the solution the future will doubtless bring, prepare ourselves for this great change by analyzing the opposing forces and looking at their positive and negative qualities? Such a task, carried out carefully and conscientiously, even if it does not lead straight to the solution, would at least have the inestimable advantage of revealing the nature of the problem, and in so doing, of putting us on our guard against all utopias."
-- System of Economic Contradictions or the Philosophy of Poverty by Pierre-Joseph Proudhon


What I'm curious about now, which of you can remember the last time that your opinion has been changed by an argument from the "other" side?


I was a Windows/proprietary software zealot until I went and installed a piece of Free/Open Source software called TIGCC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TI-89_series#Programming). This led to thoughts that maybe there is something to this "GNU (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_General_Public_License)" thing after all. When the dust settled, I had arrived at the following:

1) A rejection of most, if not all, aspects of intellectual "property" as being contrary to basic supply and demand principles and for having no existance outside of statist and anti-market coercion (my libertarianism was already well established beforehand, however, my economic rating was must higher on the positive/right side)
2) Acceptance of voluntary collectivism as being compatable with the market process and individual freedom in general.
3) An acceptance of the concept of "voluntary collectivism" at all.
4) Complete change of educational major and course of study away from computer science.

This entire slow tormented process took several very long days. My mental anguish is the inspiration for the name "Dissonant Cognition." :D It wasn't being the victim of a superior argument so much as it was realizing that all the "facts" I had assumed were true about the topic in question were in fact completely illusory.