But it's a complete non-sequitur to bring up solutions when someone criticizes a philosophical argument you made. HOORAY, SOMEBODY DIDN'T ADDRESS A POINT YOU NEVER MENTIONED. Now, maybe we should be talking about solving these problems in a concrete way. But you never said that. Apparently, you simply assumed everyone would know what you meant. Or, more likely, you are backpedaling.
This is the point I'm going to refute because the rest of it (I think) falls in line.
Let's say someone came in here and said: "I think we to forbid the acquisition of sap from this particular kind of pine tree. It makes a rather bitter syrup."
Me: "I'm not sure I buy that this is that big of a problem."
Someone: "It's still a problem but you won't hear about it. The people that do it are going around at night in very remote areas to do it."
Me: "With the information about this bitter brew and people planting fewer of these trees, it's an issue that will go away on it's own."
Someone: "What if these sour trees start producing more acorns?"
Someone else: "Yeah, these trees produce a lot of acorns."
Me: "But the population has been dwindling."
Someone: "True... these do seem to be less of a concern. But what about the trees that still exist?"
Me: "Well, maybe someone still obtains sap form those trees. Maybe that's all they know how to get sap from?"
Someone: "I don't doubt it... but maybe that's all they know and don't have the knowledge to get sap from other trees."
Someone: "I can't provide numbers... but I know that the trees exist and they are a very serious problem because this sap is extra bitter."
Me: "I'm an optimist. The reported number have been falling. People know about the bitter syrup.. things will work out. There are even services that will help landowners remove those trees if they want."
Someone: "But will the landowners do anything about it? Sure the services exist... but nobody uses them."
Someone: "These landowners choose to not clear those trees though!"
Me: "I'm not sure what to tell you. The options are out there. I mean, you can go out and cut down all those trees yourself, but it's going to be a bastard of a job trying to track all those trees down."
Someone: "Yeah there are options. Eating bitter sap. People aren't well informed of this plight. I used to eat this sap and now I've found the sweeter stuff."
Me: "You are well informed of the issue and have moved on. That's one bonus."
Someone: "You can continue to be optimistic that the other trees will overcome this bitter species, but you are still not addressing this bitter species and I will not abide that."
Me: "How do you intend to solve this? Do you want to go around marking all these trees for extermination? That seems a bit extreme."
Someone: "They want you to know that they do not approve of this bitter sap tree."
Someone: "You are presenting an overly harsh penalty for this problem I think... he wants help informing people that the trees much not be sapped."
Me: "Ok, we are aware. Why are we still arguing? I feel like someone is trying to forcefully push me into their campaign against these trees."
Someone: "I'm seriously angry with you right now."
Me: "Why? Because I think the problem will go away and they are trying to get me to join their cause?"
Someone: "What did they do, send you a flier telling you about the big bad trees?"
Someone: "You can just leave this discussion. Poor victim. You can't defend yourself? How unbearable. You can go off and talk about your ideas on how these trees will go away somewhere else. There's other communities that support your ideas that the trees are being eclipsed by the sweeter growth. If you intend on making other people silent on this issue... just be gone."
Me: "So you want to kick me out because I don't agree and you hate my viewpoint?"
Someone: "Everyone keeps saying how horrible these trees are, but nobody's offering up suggestions..."
Me: "Thanks, I said this earlier, but not so elegantly. What do you expect people to do about these trees?"
Someone: "Here's a list of things I could do..."
Angry person from earlier: "Now you want to classify this as hate? [steam] You can give your opinion, but I can also ask you to leave. You can't seem to let someone complain about these bitter trees!"
Me: "I was offering dissenting opinion. I've stated that the problem has been dwindling and is going away and people keep telling me that I'm not providing enough support."
Someone: "They stated an opinion, you stated an opinion... this is how it works."
Someone: "You are trying to shove your opinion down my throat while defending the sapping of bitter trees."
Me: "Yeah, conversation is a two way street, but I'm being told my opinion is not worth tolerance and I'm being told that I'm defending these tree sappers? All I wanted was possible solutions."
Someone: "You are defending those damn bitter tree sappers and I will not tolerate it."
Me: "Quit trying to say I'm defending those sappers. There is a method and a means for these trees to be taken care of. Short of inspecting every forest from Maine to California, you are going to have a very hard time trying to prevent someone from sapping those dwindling trees. People will have a choice between the two different syrups if they just buy that other brand, but as stated, these people don't want to try another brand, so I have no idea what you expect."
Someone: "Why do you still defend those sappers? Every post you make is clearer to point out what you really are."
Someone: "They just want to prevent people from having to eat bitter syrup."
Someone: "Why do we need a step by step solution?"
Me: "I really wish you'd stop telling me that I'm defending those sappers. I asked for solutions to correct the problem."
Someone: "You keep assuming what people think."
Me: "I'm not assuming anything. I just don't think that we can systematically trot down the street and pick out tree sappers that you think are tapping trees with that bitter sap."
Now, I won't argue the points here people keep tripping over words, but that's the gist of my conversation here, like it or not. I'm not hiding anything or trying to pin something on someone. If you read it that way, that's not my fault. I merely stated the concentration camp as one possible outcome because of historic persecution. This was continually pushed back in my face as me trying to identify someone as a Nazi... which is wholly untrue. I just have a problem with said person grouping together "tree sappers" based on their profession rather than trying to find the ones sneaking out at night. It's a comparison, not a label.
Also, how do you expect to discover a child that's in this compound that's not declared?
That's why a commission of monitoring of cult is a good idea : you'd make a visit of social workers any once in a while, with psychologist among them. If they are refused, the group may already be listed under "suspicious". You could also see if they buy child supplies, send agent around the compound to monitor it, and eventually, if a judge allow it, get a warrant and search the compound.
Edit : Among other tools of course : you could take testimony from former member, see if they have been sexually or financially exploited, see if there has been any brainwashing techniques used,...
How do you know the cult is there? Sure, if someone left, that happens. But if nobody leaves (as is the case apparently) you cannot even possibly know that the cult is there. But going as far as monitoring every citizens buying habits now steps into the realm of privacy and unjust monitoring. You also get into a realm of violation of trust when you tell random churches that you wish to send in a team of psychologists. You are bordering on religious oppression. (eg: "Why don't you send that same team into that church over there? Are you trying to harass us?" "No sir, we were told by ____ to inspect every Pentecostal church in the region to see if any of you are nut jobs.")
Author
Topic: Chill and Relaxed Progressive Irritation and Annoyance Thread (Read 875784 times)