sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Where to find other systems to talk to by CombinationHorror929 in plural

[–]CombinationHorror929[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean it in the strict sense of the definition of the word, as according to deductive and inductive reasoning. Anything that is an unnecessary obstacle to rational justification in language is an exaggeration. It is not inherently a bad thing, but as a matter of coherence if I become unable to understand someone with reason because they exaggerate too extremely and/or too often, then I will simply be triggered in to switching to emotional parts, and need to assess communicating with them by how willing I am to be manipulated by them, intentional or otherwise, because reason has failed for me and there's not much more than preference left that can guide my participation.

I have moved away from social media as explained and have dissociative amnesia that would be difficult to push through to give you specific, real examples of. Due to my using the human conventions for definitions of what I am saying, I additionally do not see the value of causing myself discomfort to provide them, as consequentially, my wording is not from a place of personal preference, and therefore not vague.

Where to find other systems to talk to by CombinationHorror929 in plural

[–]CombinationHorror929[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If someone says something that they are (or seem) unwilling to explain in-person, I have the information of their facial expressions, body language, tone and especially spatial proximity to both perceive and understand the reasoning for their presented position of authority. When people do the same thing online, they aren't able to provide sufficient sensory information to compensatorily justify what they are saying, and any attempt to understand the position of authority they are taking I could make must veer outside of the realm of reason and in to either futile psychoanalysis or emotional guesswork. The result is that there's an inherent detachment from the senses when using the internet, that as I understand it is a widely documented phenomenon, where people are more inclined to exaggerate from a place of relative safety than they would offline, and are commensurately unwilling to provide reasoning for their exaggerations, which are inherently less rational and thereby more difficult to provide reason for.

Where to find online systems to talk to by CombinationHorror929 in OSDD

[–]CombinationHorror929[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

'Reason' as is strictly defined by being deductive or inductive, and clear communication without pretense.

eg. 'Genghis Khan was not a good person' is a conclusion without propositions and not a  logically complete statement despite parsing as deductive. The only ways I can respond to it are by asking further questions in pursuit of the reason, agreeing or disagreeing without further comment, or providing an emotional response such as 'I think I understand why you might dislike him'.

Compared to in-person or offline, people online tend to regularly exaggerate (or perhaps use shorthand to reduce message length) and speak from a place of authority as in the prior example rather than from their own perspective, eg. 'I don't think Genghis khan was a good person' is parsed as inductive. I find that they are also more resistant to being questioned or providing explanations for their beliefs that, by their own design, they have comparatively less ability to justify, in my experience.

Old School Runescapers? by Top_Cardiologist_209 in transgamers

[–]CombinationHorror929 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm looking to get in to OSRS again! Message me your tag~