Forums

Mod Edit: Original topic: "Stereotype Imaging".
Premise (and original OP):

oh loli.

I can see another one of my topics above every-one's level get to spam. Stop right here, on topic.

This post is pretty hypocritical considering the point you are trying to make is that other people are prone to stereotyping, yet you suggest that people that listen to metal "often claim to be 'depressed' and 'hateful,'" and are "blatantly savage."

I think you should apologize to your mother.

It is because everyone balks at your superior intelligence and elitism. I bet you eat arugula in your salads, huh, huh?

In all seriousness, I know very little about your tastes in things, and I can imagine you being considerably annoyed by it being reduced to "liking black things."

High school "gothic" kids like black things. It matches their aching soul.

no hes just pointing out that its always rich kids with no problems tend to pretend to be something they are not.....its just a fact.

this looks like it could get interesting

no, because i didn't do anything wrong dammit.

Oh, you did. Think about it.

It's also a fact that people who listen to dark music TEND(not do) to wear black, yet he is pissed because people are stereotyping him while he HIMSELF is stereotyping another group of people.

yeah, but the logic behind this arguemnt is so complex you have to try to at least get the jist. you couold disect it all day long and you still probably would find a sentence that sums up what he wants to say in the correct logic patter that makes sense.

why do kids pretend to somthing there not, why cant they leave me alone....etc etc

Really now.

Nope. I said I don't like people that listen to metal and are blatantly savage etc etc...

I never said people that listen to metal are. I said I don't like people who listen to metal and are all that..

Jesus Christ, learn to read.

Is it that hard for you to understand that 'I don't like people who meet criteria a AND b AND c AND d...' is not equal to 'having citerium a implies having criterium b AND c AND d...'

Now please, get out of my topic and let people with the slightest bit of intelligence debate this issue in the appropriate matter. PM me if you like to continue and I will verbally slaughter you in private council.

no, its just that it has so many conflicts it becomes complex through no fault of its own, its to lame to over and over such a thing to word it politically right,.

I told some forum mods but they don't give a shit.

No I did not to any person who has a set of brain cells with a cardinality higher than the amount of Chinese girls getting older than a week this year. That's your own stereotype imagery. I didn't mean that with it and neither did I say it strictly speaking. I said x AND y, I never said 'x implies y', that you think the latter because of the former is your own inability to read and probably your tireless quiest to find some-thing to attack me on. You've failed again, sir.No, I said people, here I clearly insinuated that you were less intelligent than all the others, not that I was more intelligent than all the others, a logical consequence of course is that I am then more intelligent than you, together with all he others. In short, I called you stupid, not myself smart per se. And b) no, I 'flame' you because you again manage to draw my point out of context gracefully in your attempt to find some-thing to criticize me on. If you had some arguments then I'd remain calm. But postulating that 'I don't like people who possess the criteria x AND y' is the same as 'x implies y' certainly not valid logic.

Seriously kid, you're so searching for shit to attack me on. The last twenty debates we had I think all I've done was simply pointing out why your arguments are invalid in logical structure and no-thing more, while you try to find some new excuses which I then again break down.. Learn this valuable lesson in life: You cannot argue some-thing true in correct logic which isn't true. That's the hole reason logic was designed as a vessel for scientific and philosophical deduction by Socrates, so that when one has used correct logic throughout one's argument. We can say with confidence that whatever the conclusion is, it is valid and true. Of course, then not every-thing can just be a conclusion.

I'm not particularly fond of your use of music as examples, as it's purely subjective. There's nothing wrong with saying trance and techno are the same, because from his perspective, they very well may be. Of course, from your perspective, and mine as well, they're quite different. It may be strange, but after all, what is music but a series of notes and chords which just happen to be sensational, in some way, to our brains? What sounds completely dissimilar to one, may sound completely similar to another. Indeed by definition, there are subtle differences, but these definitions are so broad and subjective it's meaningless if one denies it.

The stereotype of people who listen to metal as being obsessed with the color black, is of course illogical, just like any other stereotype. The idea of correlations does not always result in a direct relation, as many people assume. However, they can also be quite helpful. It allows us to make inferences, which often hold to be quite accurate, assuming we know enough and do not make false stereotypes. In addition, these stereotypes are not always purely correlations, as they are often driven by cultural backgrounds. Confucianism often results in the practice of self-sacrifice, prevalent in quite a few if not most, asian households, and so on. Even in America and other western nations, this practice continues to hold a strong root in asian families, albeit weaker at times.

At some times, stereotypes become frustrating to deal with as people become so locked up in their beliefs of the validity, and direct relationships, of stereotypes to not just an individual, but large groups of people. This results in problems ranging from the oppression of slaves and women in the past, to the modern prejudice against gays, and foreigners; namely the Arabs. Attempting to demonstrate the illogical rational of such stereotypes, and the lack of contradictory facts often does nothing to dissuade others because they gain a sort of faith in the stereotypes.


by the way guys, some of you are damn terrible at trolling.

Then find the logical fallacy and don't always cut points of like you do. I always reply to every single paragraph you've written and you simply pick out some, probably because you can't think of any-thing on the others.

If you think I'm going to reply to every little point in your 8 paragraph post you are out of your damn mind. I find your general argument and compress my arguement to a more reasonably comprehensible one. Though I know it is hard for you not to go on a self-righteous rant every other post.

Also, you always get into the argument of "intelligence" or something of the matter, in simpler terms you call people stupid and digress topics completely.

Grouping people together makes it much easier and more efficient to have at least some degree of understanding about the world. It would probably entail a lot of false information about individuals in the group, and for the uninformed person it would signify prejudice.

Your argument about every human being more dangerous than average would not hold, unless there was another group you were comparing humans to, for example snails. Then you could say that humans are more dangerous than snails. When one makes a judgement on an individual in a specific group, he is not comparing that individual to members of the same group, in fact the main reasoning behind the comparison is that he is the same as the group, making the comparison with a "normal" individual possible.

I agree, though, that stereotype imaging is very annoying, especially since people generalizing are ignorant but believe themselves to be informed on the subject.