This whole thing is just some BS by
@garnett because he got his post deleted yesterday after he decided to go off on a rant for being called out on quoting another poster and just made up a positon for them.
Is this really
"Intelligent debate of newsworthy issues." nope, it's just
@garnett being miffed because the mods deleted his post which added nothing.
Similarly, we could say:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some interactions I've had recently have led me to read up a bit on a few psychological tendencies, namely:
- Hallucinations: This refers to the tendency to believe something else has been said, without recognising or understanding different perspective. In psychology, this is often noted in individuals with Schizophrenia.
- Pragmatic Language Impairment: This refers to difficulties in the use of language in social contexts. Individuals with schizophrenia often struggle other points of view etc..
- etc..
In a debating arena, how should these be tackled?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Obviously that would be a ridiculous thing to do.
If you're making up positions for others, especially if you're doing so even after they've clearly stated that their position is X not Y, then you're not doing anything fancy, there's no "context blindness", you're just making up a straw man to attack because you can't debate the actual point they raised.
To try and turn it into doing some psychological diagnosis or citing disabilities is frankly quite pathetic.
Why not accept that people have different views, you're not going to like everyone's style of debate but if you're unable to play the ball rather than the man then don't engage... no one is forcing you to after all.
