No its related In that, I dont believe the lurkers are appreciating it like you think they are. And that logical responses are often still beaten by emotional forces. And, getting the high of watching a “nerd” get dunked on is likely more of not all of the counter arguments received perspective when commenting against the perceived right take of a community.
If you are commenting, you are doing it for yourself. Inventing an imaginary person that is receiving your argument other than the person you are talking to is silly and delusional in the truest sense of that word.
Imagining their existence without proof is though. Teaching people is different then screaming into a black box and relying on faith that it did.
And here we are back at the emotional response overpowering the logical one. If you want to teach actually do it than hoping you are passively doing it.
Is your argument that you don’t think anyone else reads what people post on social media, and that it has no effect if they do? Respectfully are you insane?
Right, see how this didnt change your opinion and the magical third person inspired by our conversation would come away with what from this?
Talking to people has impact. Imagining you are talking to imaginary people when you talk to someone else, is not that. But sure. I am probably insane. It doesnt seem like there is a single sane person on the planet looking at our environment. And me treating each interaction as its own is somehow so much worse than having an imaginary friend to comfort your ego.
To busy trying to find how to defend your position you won’t even look at it critically.
No its related In that, I dont believe the lurkers are appreciating it like you think they are. And that logical responses are often still beaten by emotional forces. And, getting the high of watching a “nerd” get dunked on is likely more of not all of the counter arguments received perspective when commenting against the perceived right take of a community.
If you are commenting, you are doing it for yourself. Inventing an imaginary person that is receiving your argument other than the person you are talking to is silly and delusional in the truest sense of that word.
I don’t think it’s delusional to want to teach people things. When you respectfully deconstruct someone’s half truths it can help people understand.
This is not to say that you should take everything seriously or that every person is worth engaging with of course you still have to be selective.
Imagining their existence without proof is though. Teaching people is different then screaming into a black box and relying on faith that it did.
And here we are back at the emotional response overpowering the logical one. If you want to teach actually do it than hoping you are passively doing it.
Is your argument that you don’t think anyone else reads what people post on social media, and that it has no effect if they do? Respectfully are you insane?
Right, see how this didnt change your opinion and the magical third person inspired by our conversation would come away with what from this?
Talking to people has impact. Imagining you are talking to imaginary people when you talk to someone else, is not that. But sure. I am probably insane. It doesnt seem like there is a single sane person on the planet looking at our environment. And me treating each interaction as its own is somehow so much worse than having an imaginary friend to comfort your ego.
To busy trying to find how to defend your position you won’t even look at it critically.
You’re proving my point for me: you’re boxing with your own ghosts rather than engaging what I actually said.