I grew up in the Westboro Baptist Church. Here's why I left | Megan Phelps-Roper

[woolfe9998]

For me, "why I left the Westboro Baptist Church" is roughly equivalent to "why I stopped setting myself on fire". It does not promise great intellectual insights. If I'm searching for wisdom, I'm probably not finding it in the person who took a couple decades to recognize what literally everyone else (statistically speaking) knows from their first encounter.

Missing the point again. The talk isn't about leaving the Westboro Baptist Church and expecting people to think she's somehow awesome for doing it. It's that people with radically opposing views can have constructive dialogue which can actually lead to people changing their minds, which is what happened to her. This isn't actually all that common, especially for people who are extremely religious. Yet it happened here, not because she's so great, but because the people who talked her out of it had an approach that actually worked. An approach which she explains. An approach which might not be such a bad thing to consider given how polarized our current political culture has become. That was her point.

I fail to see how your remarks have the slightest bearing on that.

 

[justoh]

Missing the point again. The talk isn't about leaving the Westboro Baptist Church and expecting people to think she's somehow awesome for doing it. It's that people with radically opposing views can have constructive dialogue which can actually lead to people changing their minds, which is what happened to her. This isn't actually all that common, especially for people who are extremely religious. Yet it happened here, not because she's so great, but because the people who talked her out of it had an approach that actually worked. An approach which she explains. An approach which might not be such a bad thing to consider given how polarized our current political culture has become. That was her point.

I fail to see how your remarks have the slightest bearing on that.

Weren't you the guy who went to the toilet tier, jesuit ls? Maybe that's why you think it's an interesting, novel idea that dialogue and argument can change minds.

 

[woolfe9998]

Weren't you the guy who went to the toilet tier, jesuit ls? Maybe that's why you think it's an interesting, novel idea that dialogue and argument can change minds.

Why have you posted in this thread 4 times to say you aren't interested in the topic of the thread? Are you trying to convince people who find it interesting to not find it interesting? Nah, you're just being a troll.

 

[Moonbeam]

Why have you posted in this thread 4 times to say you aren't interested in the topic of the thread? Are you trying to convince people who find it interesting to not find it interesting? Nah, you're just being a troll.

I don't think that's it. If you observe people with particularly bad feelings about themselves, where this phenomenon is more visibly expressed, you will note that people will drag others back in to the slime pit if they feel somebody is escaping and showing signs of healthy change. Misery loves company is the common way it is expressed. In werepossum's case, it expressed as competitive jealousy. Somebody is getting praised and he's not so he has to deride her achievement pretending it's nothing. None of this happens at a conscious level because we don't like seeing how disgusting and petty our behavior is.

What amuses me is that in a contest as to who could be more disusing the woman in the video in her prime could have beaten justoh and werepossum to death. That somebody that sick could get well is what they resent. They see no hope for themselves, convinced they are too worthless to change.

 

[justoh]

Why have you posted in this thread 4 times to say you aren't interested in the topic of the thread? Are you trying to convince people who find it interesting to not find it interesting? Nah, you're just being a troll.

Except that's not all i've been stating. The OP didn't provide any reason as to why something fairly assumed to be uninteresting wouldn't be. After watching it anyway, it turned out that the assumption was correct, although that vindication wasn't worth the 15 minutes. Your explanation I last quoted just summarized how trivial the talk was. If you didn't already know that it matters how one engages another in dialogue then that probably just means you're an idiot.

 

[Moonbeam]

Except that's not all i've been stating. The OP didn't provide any reason as to why something fairly assumed to be uninteresting wouldn't be. After watching it anyway, it turned out that the assumption was correct, although that vindication wasn't worth the 15 minutes. Your explanation I last quoted just summarized how trivial the talk was. If you didn't already know that it matters how one engages another in dialogue then that probably just means you're an idiot.

This is clear? You are not capable of experiencing an appreciation of what it takes to awaken from emotional numbness so you see the world in a numbed state. The assumptions you make cause the world to look dead. That is your tragedy and the external manifestation of your inner suffering and your inability to relieve yourself of that burden makes you mean. You try to inflict others with your own pain by calling them idiots too stupid to know how to communicate, all the while, unable yourself understand what good communication takes. You live in a bomb shelter in darkness, afraid to come out. The video is all about somebody who used to be you and because you are still you, you can't see it. It's more than uninteresting, it's threatening to you.

Truth is a bitter pill, but it makes you well. If a little girl can do it,
why not a big tough guy like you?

 

[NesuD]

For me, "why I left the Westboro Baptist Church" is roughly equivalent to "why I stopped setting myself on fire". It does not promise great intellectual insights. If I'm searching for wisdom, I'm probably not finding it in the person who took a couple decades to recognize what literally everyone else (statistically speaking) knows from their first encounter.

Fortunately for her there were those who did not wear the blinders that you do and patiently helped her to understand.

 

[woolfe9998]

Except that's not all i've been stating. The OP didn't provide any reason as to why something fairly assumed to be uninteresting wouldn't be. After watching it anyway, it turned out that the assumption was correct, although that vindication wasn't worth the 15 minutes. Your explanation I last quoted just summarized how trivial the talk was. If you didn't already know that it matters how one engages another in dialogue then that probably just means you're an idiot.

First of all, the words you used to describe my reaction to the OP's video, "interesting" and "novel," were not my words. They were yours. I found the video mildly interesting, enough to hold my attention for a few minutes. Her central idea is certainly not new or profound. It is, however, both valid and topical. It may also be somewhat controversial given recent studies which show that people tend to harden their beliefs when confronted with inconvenient information, suggesting that trying to persuade people to abandon irrational beliefs is a fools errand.

However, the fact is that very few people actually approach debate in the way she suggests. And very few people ever change their minds on anything in the course of a debate, particularly those with fringe or extremist views. So while the idea that you can change someone's mind with reasoned debate, in theory, isn't particularly new or insightful, apparently it bears repetition and emphasis. As does the observation that we might want to change our tactics if we ever expect to persuade, given that the vast majority of people do not use the methods she suggests and they almost always fail to persuade.

What I found slightly more interesting than the video was your apparent need to tear it down. When I find myself not interested in the topic of a thread, I avoid the thread.

 

[justoh]

First of all, the words you used to describe my reaction to the OP's video, "interesting" and "novel," were not my words. They were yours. I found the video mildly interesting, enough to hold my attention for a few minutes. Her central idea is certainly not new or profound. It is, however, both valid and topical. It may also be somewhat controversial given recent studies which show that people tend to harden their beliefs when confronted with inconvenient information, suggesting that trying to persuade people to abandon irrational beliefs is a fools errand.

However, the fact is that very few people actually approach debate in the way she suggests. And very few people ever change their minds on anything in the course of a debate, particularly those with fringe or extremist views. So while the idea that you can change someone's mind with reasoned debate, in theory, isn't particularly new or insightful, apparently it bears repetition and emphasis. As does the observation that we might want to change our tactics if we ever expect to persuade, given that the vast majority of people do not use the methods she suggests and they almost always fail to persuade.

What I found slightly more interesting than the video was your apparent need to tear it down. When I find myself not interested in the topic of a thread, I avoid the thread.

I was critical of the OP and the context of the video in p&n, since it's not news or even political, without the silly, speculative, boring abstraction provided by people other than the OP. I did say it was a shit ted talk, but that's only relative to other ted talks. To you it's a "tear down" of the video because you're a bit thick, I guess. Since I know you're still smarter than most of your buddies here, I invited you to admit that it wasn't really interesting (not even as interesting as my needs are, apparently), along with your implicit suggestion (it seems) that those finding it particularly interesting (the "best example and explanation" lulz.) must be less sophisticated than yourself. That's a bit rude of you.

I would have "avoid[ed] the thread" if the OP hadn't promised so much from something with so little promise, and without explanation. And at least I had the tenacity to watch the entire thing!

 

[NesuD]

I was critical of the OP and the context of the video in p&n, since it's not news or even political, without the silly, speculative, boring abstraction provided by people other than the OP. I did say it was a shit ted talk, but that's only relative to other ted talks. To you it's a "tear down" of the video because you're a bit thick, I guess. Since I know you're still smarter than most of your buddies here, I invited you to admit that it wasn't really interesting (not even as interesting as my needs are, apparently), along with your implicit suggestion (it seems) that those finding it particularly interesting (the "best example and explanation" lulz.) must be less sophisticated than yourself. That's a bit rude of you.

I would have "avoid[ed] the thread" if the OP hadn't promised so much from something with so little promise, and without explanation. And at least I had the tenacity to watch the entire thing!

I cannot teach him. The boy has no patience.
Much anger in him, like his father.
He is not ready!

 

[Moonbeam]

I was critical of the OP and the context of the video in p&n, since it's not news or even political, without the silly, speculative, boring abstraction provided by people other than the OP. I did say it was a shit ted talk, but that's only relative to other ted talks. To you it's a "tear down" of the video because you're a bit thick, I guess. Since I know you're still smarter than most of your buddies here, I invited you to admit that it wasn't really interesting (not even as interesting as my needs are, apparently), along with your implicit suggestion (it seems) that those finding it particularly interesting (the "best example and explanation" lulz.) must be less sophisticated than yourself. That's a bit rude of you.

I would have "avoid[ed] the thread" if the OP hadn't promised so much from something with so little promise, and without explanation. And at least I had the tenacity to watch the entire thing!

Promises are very upsetting to the emotionally numb. They drive the apple bonkers and blue meanies crazy. "Must eliminate error!"