There are different ways to bring things to express. Often one would like to round up his mind by a famous quote, sometimes it takes a known issue back to clarify why perhaps more than the other person is just wrong. Morally reprehensible and not the method is clear and well known. However, this can sometimes
conclusions about the verbal shooters, namely, if proved obvious is that you realize not even be said. This assumption is generally the case when - comes from the fact that few people want, in a discussion, to shoot himself in the foot - common sense presupposing.
A classic example to which it is to go here is the accusation: "... selective perception".
What at first glance a little "blue", "The Eagle Has Landed, "" I now buy two pounds of flour, respectively, may sound other trivial phrases, turns out on closer inspection, often as a statement of quality: "I'm going to heavy stone combine with this my foot and my cry of pain will be a beacon for the truth. "
Because perception is subjective and therefore regularly selective. will underline this self-attack on reason by an example that can be ofmals also seen as a cognitive disorder. rarest Namely perceived that their own views are not necessarily the right , and that "truth" is just an expression.
Such things happen every day. Questioned you witness an accident, you can be sure I can hear the different versions - especially if a time lag exists between the events or require of questions a detail that all too commonplace in the flood threatened to drown other perceptions. That is the product of our brain that constructs only a reproduction of the truth and can be fooled too easily.
We are all inclined, especially in heated discussions, to brand our opinion the concept of truth and to send into the race. Very few are willing to occasionally deviate from it if the arguments are valid or does the empathy one's own ego stop. This versatility, which is also often ridiculed like is, plain and egreifend result of a self-critical attitude that many people today have lost.
Or even "had to come."
Thanks to a highly specialized world focuses on the concept of truth for each person ever smaller, even tiny aspect that one does not want to let wegreden you. The gold rush mentality of the past gives way to the realization that in this day and age there is not much there, what it's worth going into defensive stance. Specifically the knowledge, therefore also spread too much.
can therefore, if you yourself mentally through such a maze the special knowledge has moved, but at least go out like that one right at least in this one point is located. Or? Why should we even differ. It must be right, ergo interested in the "truth" of the others do not.
they should.
reason, it was said in the days of the Enlightenment, is the ability to rise from his self-imposed immaturity and to use his mind. This one is aware of impending impotence all too often and it is not surprising that we occasionally defended tooth and nail, what one has yet. But the Enlightenment never wanted.
standstill is immaturity.
His understanding is to use well, not just critical of others but also to itself to stay never to persevere and understand that "truth" is a changeable concept that one must plug in setbacks and move forward. We might speak of a subjective truth inflation, one could speak of Wahrheitsentropie.
One could consider during the next debate just before the response, whether the person against but not for a moment, albeit partially, may be right. And then one might wonder whether the motivation for the denial from the objectivity feeds - or at least of the emotions. A deeper look into one's own soul would be sufficient enough.
then you should the question of who performs what is really selective, may well answer itself.
0 comments:
Post a Comment