It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Shadowflux
Personally, I don't think it's a problem of opinions, rather it's not a problem at all. It's simply the result of a community getting larger and is indictative of the success of ATS, which has already shown it's ability to expand and evolve by the fact that it's gotten this far and reached this many people. *SNIP*
However, I must agree, somthing should be done. *SNIP*
We would all lose if ATS adopted some form of educational segregation. We cannot reprogram our members, deny hyprocrisy. *SNIP*
Originally posted by Muaddib
I see a couple of problems in here. If I understand what Soficrow is trying to say, she thinks that ATS and ATSNN is here to teach members?....
What exactly is there to teach, and who should define exactly what members should learn?.... Should the majority of ATS and ATSNN who are liberal define what "new members and everyone should learn?" ...Soficrow, i see what you are sugesting as indoctrination....
BTW, what exactly would these new titles, if members pass whatever tests, provide as a whole to the members?
www.rickross.com...
Coercive persuasion and thought reform are alternate names for programs of social influence capable of producing substantial behavior and attitude change through the use of coercive tactics, persuasion, and/or interpersonal and group-based influence manipulations (Schein 1961; Lifton 1961). Such programs have also been labeled "brainwashing" (Hunter 1951), a term more often used in the media than in scientific literature. However identified, these programs are distinguishable from other elaborate attempts to influence behavior and attitudes, to socialize, and to accomplish social control. Their distinguishing features are their totalistic qualities (Lifton 1961), the types of influence procedures they employ, and the organization of these procedures into three distinctive subphases of the overall process (Schein 1961; Ofshe and Singer 1986). The key factors that distinguish coercive persuasion from other training and socialization schemes are:
1. The reliance on intense interpersonal and psychological attack to destabilize an individual's sense of self to promote compliance
2. The use of an organized peer group
3. Applying interpersonal pressure to promote conformity
4. The manipulation of the totality of the person's social environment to stabilize behavior once modified
Thought-reform programs have been employed in attempts to control and indoctrinate individuals, societal groups (e.g., intellectuals), and even entire populations. Systems intended to accomplish these goals can vary considerably in their construction.
From: Coercive Persuasion and Attitude Change
Encyclopedia of Sociology Volume 1, Macmillan Publishing Company, New York
By Richard J. Ofshe, Ph.D.
Originally posted by Seekerof
How about these?
Perhaps they will explain and educate on some of the "tactics" used, as insinuated by yourself, soficrow.
I mean geee, if we are going to make aware and educate on how to defend oneself, then lets reveal them all?
Fallacies
Originally posted by MaskedAvatar
I think that of the two, the blue medal looks classier and more prestigious on a muted background.
Originally posted by MaskedAvatar
I think that of the two, the blue medal looks classier and more prestigious on a muted background.
Originally posted by soficrow
There are people here manipulating individuals and the group - it's part of a larger conspiracy.
Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
Originally posted by soficrow
There are people here manipulating individuals and the group - it's part of a larger conspiracy.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
The only way to "end the dark days" is to realize that by engaging in stereotype-laden divisive debate, you're playing their game. If we are to acknowledge that the polarization of issues has been a systematic strategy, we have to learn to stop the knee-jerk reactions to "the other side".
Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
This is a far deeper issue than any feature or posting strategy can solve here on ATS.
Originally posted by JoeDoaks
I wonder sometimes what ATS is going to do when an obvious sub-grouper gets WATS. That will add credence to the sub-group agenda pursuit and further their goals. It will happen and it will be interesting. Do WATS holders get warnings? Do any get banned?
Originally posted by JoeDoaks
This is a strange topic- I find myself totally in agreement with Muaddid and Seeker in the same thread. Heretofore I could have said 'I NEVER agree with Muaddid, but alas, no more.
To fight amongst ourselves at this juncture is tantamount to an ant colony of mixed genetic heritage, adrift on a river and consuming itself because of petty ancestral rivalry. It will lead us inexorably into the depths, because cooperation is not a luxury, but a necessity for those beings at the mercy of larger forces.
Originally posted by Majic
Posts Instead Of Personalities
Originally posted by JoeDoaks
This is a strange topic- I find myself totally in agreement with Muaddid and Seeker in the same thread. Heretofore I could have said 'I NEVER agree with Muaddid, but alas, no more.
That means you are abandoning at least one of your prejudices and evaluating the opinions instead of the people who hold them.
Originally posted by soficrow
............
....A LOT of manipulation occurs here camouflaged as 'debunking' and 'debate' - and the un-prepared are sucked in or left floundering, with no recourse but to resort to name-calling, because they know at a gut level they're being abused.
..........
Originally posted by Muaddib
Originally posted by soficrow
............
....A LOT of manipulation occurs here camouflaged as 'debunking' and 'debate' - and the un-prepared are sucked in or left floundering, with no recourse but to resort to name-calling, because they know at a gut level they're being abused.
..........
I am sorry...are you actually saying that even though it can be proven that some theory is wrong that the debunking is just manipulation?
So, if something can be proven to be wrong, according to you, the debunking is just manipulation and it is a lie..... is that how we deny ignorance?....