|
Tweakers' Asylum Tweaks for systems, rooms and Do It Yourself (DIY) help. FAQ. |
|
|
|
Tweakers' Asylum Tweaks for systems, rooms and Do It Yourself (DIY) help. FAQ. |
|
In Reply to: A response, and a very serious question in return. posted by David Aiken on March 17, 2005 at 15:48:24:
David, a possible pair of thought processes might go something like:CASE 1 "He/ she doesn't quite get whatever it is, and ME, I know that there is something there to be gotten, but, as with him being a naysayer, it probably isn't worth the time or potential flame to attempt to show him the error of his way. What's the point?" Or, within your premise, "Maybe they just made an honest mistake".
CASE 2 "Oh, you bozo, how could you be so gullible/ weak/ dumb? I KNOW there is nothing there, and you are obviously a sucker/ putz/ moron, for thinking that there is."
It just seems easier to attack someone, rather than correct or educate them. Lazyness? Perhaps. Also, it would seem easier to go after someone when that someone seems to be getting something when nothing is there to get. Or seemingly nothing to be got. It may be the difference between someone simply expressing a wrong opinion, (your "honest mistake") as opposed to someone who is guilty of a much more serious mistake, bordering on the criminal, that of being fooled. (Being a fool?) We always tend to ridicule those who have been "had". Additionally, there may be an element of "degrees of rightness", versus "degrees of wrongness", if you will.
I'm sure there is a basic psychological maxim or premise at work here, I just don't know what the correct term is.It is a shame that there is so much division, which always spirals downward. It seems division creates ever more division.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: A very serious question - Djhymn 22:45:52 03/17/05 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
