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.

 

Stop being a know-it-all

page: 3
1
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 28 2006 @ 11:07 PM
link   
Allow an old know-it-all to answer...?


Originally posted by Enkidu
... So, sure, go on and post your little posts that mean nothing but a bit more wasted time, but what difference does it make, because all time is a waste. Just long stretches of tedium puncutated occasionally by the thrill of horror, destined to end badly.


Remember that somewhat glurgerrific story about the old man and the starfish ( www.scrapbook.com... )?

Well, a lot of us go around and throw out posts and research (and actions and deeds) into the great sea of time and space and humanity... and it won't change the sea or the tide or the times... but somewhere out there, it matters to some ONE.

I realize my Pagan religion is showing here, but in my humble opinion everything we do matters. Our lives are the stories woven on time and our actions are often significant in ways we don't know.

So yeah, it might be a pointless exercise, but I go throwing starfish back into the ocean anyway. Somewhere, there's a reader, and the words mattered to that one.




posted on Mar, 29 2006 @ 12:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by apocalypticon

Originally posted by AngelWings9999

Give the 20 year old's another 10 years, and they will start to mellow!
Remember those years, when especially turning 21, one had all the answers! lol


Man, do I remember!! I knew so much about life that I harrassed my folks into finally signing for me to enlist in the Army at 17 yrs. old during Vietnam.
My dad, a Korean War combat vet, kept trying to tell me "It's not going to be like what you think it is going to be like." Did I listen? Noooo.....it took my own experience of that reality to begin to realize that maybe the "old man" actually could get it right on some things. This is an epiphany which has only increased over time.

Now, if only my own girls, 16 and 24, would realize my great storehouse of wisdom...


Hee Hee and wearn't we all too proudful back then to let good ol Dad know he was right! Maybe now, lol but definitely not then!

I too was thinking about joining the Navy, and if it wasn't for the dirty old Navy officer who made a sly pass at me, I would have joined. Well my Grandmother gave her two cents & informed me well in advance that Navy Life surely wasn't for me- Bless Her Soul - But boy did I want to prove Dad wrong back then! Gulp
So I opted instead to moving out at 18 & lived with 14 other people in what today's society would call a Animal House lol! Let's say I lasted 7 months. Dad never said a word. I think if I heard I told you so, well He knew better..... lol It was 2 long years before I could find a place where me and my best friend could afford!
Funny how History repeats itself, I had wanted to warn my Son, as he too proudly moved into one at the same Manly age of 18 also. I didn't dare....lol
He on the other hand, had only 5 other roomies to deal with. He lasted about 6 months. Me knowing the traumatic affects that can do to a young soul lol so I found him a great apartment that him and his best buddy could swing without all the other animals festering within the barn lol!
I never said I told you so, I didn't need to - I remembered.... I dared not! lol Remember that song on Archie, Those were the days .....



posted on Mar, 29 2006 @ 01:02 AM
link   
It is a wonderful post. I've learned a lot from Gemwolf's essay. But there's a little thing that bothers me about it. By labeling some posters a "know-it-all", people are penalizing the knowledgable. Can someone be intellectual without being labeled a know-it-all?

On the board, there are some posters that presume by their posts they are the "last and single authority" on the topic. Those are the posts that frighten me because: 1)whatever you say, it will be wrong; 2)if you do ask a question, the "know-it-all" tells you that your opinions do not matter and sends you to click on their "endorsed" links; 3) refuse to hear your point of view and labels your post as being "silly".

The reason why I joined this board is to engage in thought-provoking and fascinating discussions related to issues affecting the world. And that experience is dampened when a poster presumes to insult you or belittle your knowledge for the sake of theirs.

What then, are the protocols for being knowledgable?

[edit on 29-3-2006 by ceci2006]



posted on Mar, 29 2006 @ 01:11 AM
link   
I don't believe that this thread was meant to set protocols, only to raise awareness of tendencies that most of us possess and sometimes overwhelm us. Anyone who speaks authoritatively on a subject or provides substantive evidence against another's claim is subject to being labeled a knowitall. I think the real issue here is obstinance and arrogance, not open and vigorous discussion.



posted on Mar, 29 2006 @ 01:27 AM
link   
I'm more or less speechless about the response to my post. 13 U2U's with 11 Applauses and many WATS. Thank you for the pats on the back and the "well done's" from all the friends and mods. Giving my post bar that red tinge makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside...


I'm just glad to see that I'm not completely paranoid or crazy, and that many other ATSers feel the same way.

One thing I learned from this post is exactly what I was preaching... A post from the heart gets so much more reaction than a "wannabe intellectual" post.

OK, that's enough of that soppiness. I'll try my best to respond to some of the replies, which require response, as time allows me.

Many thanks.



posted on Mar, 29 2006 @ 01:40 AM
link   
What a thread to waste my first post upon.

Over the last 6-7 years I have traveled from message board to message board, from chat room to chat room, through all of the mysterious and wonderful places that people gather to discuss their thoughts, and ideas, and in each and every one I have observed a very simple fact.

Much like in life, there are people that for whatever their reasons, they wish to pretend that they are "better" than everyone else.

Unlike in real life though, on a board such as this you have to present what I like to call the "Cranial You". Instead of blissfully cruising along through life on your movie star good looks, in a place such as this, you have to represent yourself in a manner that is devoid of physical appearance.

We all suspect that each of the rest of us members have two eyes, two ears, a nose ect....., but we are not sure of the composition of those features.

On a message board we thus have to "create" an appearance that is strictly made up of the transfer of thought, through the fingers to the keyboard, down the internet, and then that "Cranial You" appearance arrives onto the board.

In life we cannot do a whole lot to change our appearance or the way that others might perceive us. Most of you might think I'm a fat ignorant hillbilly while others might be surprised at my appearance if you were to meet me in real life. I might not look anything like what your conception of my common features are.

That is where the problem is.

Some people are so disconnected from real human contact that they do not learn proper etiquette and simple behavioral techniques that allow the rest of us to maintain some sort of civilized society.

Musicians are a good example. They spend so much time and effort in perfecting their ability that they neglect their social manners thus whenever they are confronted with a real world dilemma or challenge they are at a loss as how to handle it. (Stay with me here).

It is like a guitar player that thinks he is so good that he has to turn up his volume in order to drown out any others that are playing. He's perfected his craft in his own mind so ;"How dare a mere mortal challenge me?" "I will show him", thus he then proceeds to rip out a 30 minute blistering guitar solo that just blows out a bunch of noise without it really being music.

Then he steps back and wonders why everyone is not worshiping him like a God. Suddenly all of those years of working so hard at learning is not paying off so the only response he is capable of is to rip off another solo, that is even louder and longer.

(Sorry about the weak analogy).

What we see then is the "Cranial You" becoming the "Anal You".

Yes, we understand that you have a stack of credentials that cover a whole wall ,and that you are the next Steven Hawking, but if you do not temper your posts with reason, and wisdom, and courtesy, then you are just blowing noise that the rest of us cannot, or will not listen too.

Each and every board that I have ever been a member of has such people.

The term; "Know it alls" has been bandied about, but I prefer a different description, or title for such people.

I call them; "Forum Floozies" (Sorry ladies. I actually use the 'W' word to title them).

They stake out there little niche, or corner of a board, and try to dominate it just like a street walker defending her corner. Beware all those that trespass, because you will be propositioned and they will try and seduce you with their wiles, and if you disdain their attempts then .....................


It's a sad fact that such people cannot enlighten their fellow members, but instead they wish to bully and browbeat them with their "superior" knowledge.

Turn down the volume and I might just understand, or care to listen to what you are trying to say.

/ new guy rant



posted on Mar, 29 2006 @ 02:24 AM
link   
RecDude,

Sadly, some people can't seem to employ "Cranial" and "Anal" in a logical and accurate fashion. Anal people, for example, tend to be geniuses (I'm not kidding). It takes that kind of exacting attention to detail, to rise above the common place, which is often necessary to achieve new knowledge. And some folks will call people Anal just because they disagree with them, which has no bearing on a person's temperament, and more to do with having an opinion in the first place.

I had to ask myself that question, a long time ago: Why do you need to have an opinion about things? I still haven't figured out the answer to that question. Perhaps it's a search for the truth, presented for public consumption, so that it can either be disproved or supported. Maybe, we who like to learn and form opinions, are simply hoping to be enlightened ourselves, even if it means that enlightenment arrives via a series of trials and errors that we perform via our cranial anal-yses?



posted on Mar, 29 2006 @ 02:40 AM
link   
Undo.

I myself am someone who forms opinions, i don't do it on purpose though. I like facts and read alot of them so forming an opinion happens almost passivly. I believe this is the case with most people.

I think you are right, people who form opinions just want to find things out. To discover something they don't know. The problem comes when someone has formed an opinion and won't change it regardless of new facts. My opinions have changed on varies things as new details have come to light.

Maybe the people who hold on to opinions even after new evidence shows itself are simply to fond of their opinion to let it go. Maybe they just can't change it because they have to be right, infallible maybe and admitting your opinion was wrong would i suppose mess with taht view.



posted on Mar, 29 2006 @ 02:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
Undo.

I myself am someone who forms opinions, i don't do it on purpose though. I like facts and read alot of them so forming an opinion happens almost passivly. I believe this is the case with most people.

I think you are right, people who form opinions just want to find things out. To discover something they don't know. The problem comes when someone has formed an opinion and won't change it regardless of new facts. My opinions have changed on varies things as new details have come to light.

Maybe the people who hold on to opinions even after new evidence shows itself are simply to fond of their opinion to let it go. Maybe they just can't change it because they have to be right, infallible maybe and admitting your opinion was wrong would i suppose mess with taht view.


Aye, if we were scientists, our opinions would be worth money and awards on the wall and people would respect us! mwahaha ha....ha....ha?



posted on Mar, 29 2006 @ 03:01 AM
link   
Dude if I was a scientist it would mean the end of the world! Who would put someone like me near a lab or particle accelerator? God knows what I would do accidentally!



Very sorry i went a bit off topic there, i really don't want to provoke the wrath of you mods.

[edit on 29-3-2006 by ImaginaryReality1984]



posted on Mar, 29 2006 @ 03:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by undo
RecDude,

Sadly, some people can't seem to employ "Cranial" and "Anal" in a logical and accurate fashion.
.

I was just trying to employ a simple analogy. We can dissect the meanings of "Cranial" vs "Anal" for another three pages, but in the end I think we can all determine which type attitude another member is employing.


Anal people, for example, tend to be geniuses (I'm not kidding). It takes that kind of exacting attention to detail, to rise above the common place, which is often necessary to achieve new knowledge.


I would assume that such anal retentive types are necessary in order for knowledge to progress. Technology has out paced most people's ability to understand complex systems as a whole.

Anal expressive people however are not necessary.

As a teacher I always had to remember that in order to insure that the knowledge was passed along I had to "teach down" to my slowest students. It was much easier to just breeze along with the; "I went to college so you had better listen to me, because I'm smarter than you" style, but it didn't work.

I found that in order to create interest, and develop knowledge, that I had to maintain the passion, but strip away any vestiges of intellectual arrogance.

That is the conflict in so many boards in that you are basically in a "one room school house" type environment where there are all levels of ability. You shouldn't get mad at a third grader because he/she can't do eighth grade math.


And some folks will call people Anal just because they disagree with them, which has no bearing on a person's temperament, and more to do with having an opinion in the first place.


There are many, many subjects where people will never be swayed from their position, or opinion no matter what the evidence may be to the contrary. It's like having a child tell you no over and over and thus you begin to get frustrated at their obstinacy and ignorance.

That is where the name calling starts. One person gets mad at another and off they go at each others throats. Just like kids.


I had to ask myself that question, a long time ago: Why do you need to have an opinion about things? I still haven't figured out the answer to that question.


Opinions are what we have when we lack facts.

In my opinion we need to study Dark Matter more than look for water in our solar system. Someone else will have the opinion that we need to do the opposite. The truth is that neither of us may have the facts to be right.





Perhaps it's a search for the truth, presented for public consumption, so that it can either be disproved or supported. Maybe, we who like to learn and form opinions, are simply hoping to be enlightened ourselves, even if it means that enlightenment arrives via a series of trials and errors that we perform via our cranial anal-yses?


I would like to think that we could all be adult enough to "bring something to the table', present it, and let others take away what they may without all the bitterness and acrimony.


I can guarantee you one simple belief.

That is the belief that I know for a fact that I don't know it all.

I will ask stupid questions and make stupid posts. I have stood in front of a room full of the most judgmental teenagers that you could ever imagine, and not worry one bit about what they thought about me as a person.

I assure all of you that I don't care what you think about me in here.

I will bring my dish to the table and let those who wish to take from it do so in friendship, and with fellowship.

I may laugh with you, but I will never laugh at you.

No matter what you believe.



posted on Mar, 29 2006 @ 04:40 AM
link   
Recdude,

Facts are debatable, as will become evident upon a cursory summary of past facts that have since been proven false. The fact, those facts were found false, is not mentioned or pointed out in polite scholarly circles, but the fact other facts that they don't agree with are proven to be less than factual, is never treated politely and resounded from the highest mountaintop, frequently. In fact, most facts that have since been proven at least wrong in part, are only handled politely, if the people are peers. If they aren't peers, the gloves are off. This is true across the board. Why anyone would be surprised at that, is beyond me.

Allow me to give you an example:

The German High Critics, the very same who decided all the ancient histories were fairy tales and not facts, decided the reason some of them were fairy tales was due to their belief that the greeks couldn't write during the time many of their histories were supposedly written. Of course, this was discovered later to not be true and yes, the greeks could write, but it was already too late to back pedal on it. That iincorrect theory had been used to construct incomplete timelines for places like Egypt because the greek histories were rendered useless, afterall, they couldn't write, so their histories were false. To this day, it isn't mentioned in polite scholarly circles that the greeks COULD write and therefore, the greek histories were alot more legitimate than originally assumed. Cause ya see, all those corrections would have to be made to other sciences which assumed the same thing at the time, including history books, archaeology, and critical works on religion in ancient times.

Being proven false is something no one is apparently interested in, and least of all, those who have degrees and are trained in a given area. They have more at stake than the average joe or joelene, including their reputations. Their list of scholarly works could suddenly become less than factual, especially if they relied heavily on incorrect information. So then it becomes a matter of whose facts are more factual.

You appear to buy into, at least in part, the theory that mainstream facts are more factual than any other facts, and as a result, anyone who doesn't buy into mainstream facts in a given area, are just being stubborn and hard-headed. But don't you see, they are no more accurate than the researcher who isn't mainstream, if they aren't going to fix their facts when their facts are found false. Just more of the same factless facts. Who to believe? Yourself, of course.
But ya gotta be willing to accept the facts you find and accept that some facts, ain't facts at all.



posted on Mar, 29 2006 @ 06:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by undo
Recdude,

Facts are debatable..................

Allow me to give you an example:

.......................................


You appear to buy into, at least in part, the theory that mainstream facts are more factual than any other facts, and as a result, anyone who doesn't



Just the facts and only the facts - Joe Friday?




I tend to rely upon observable conclusions for primary knowledge.

Examples:

If I drink 12 beers I know for a fact that at some point I will have to pee. Even if I die in the process of consumption.

Speculation would be how many times that I might estimate that I have to go pee. 4-5? Maybe more?

Opinion could include your estimate of how many times that I might have to go pee.

Observation would be our compilation of the number of times that I did go pee.

Results would be our agreed upon number of times that I did go pee.

Conclusion would include the realm of possibility that a human may have to pee X number of times after consuming 12 beers.

For the sake of our example we will use a conclusion of 5 times.

Therefore if a person, unknown to me, states that he/she consumed 12 beers and had to pee 5 times then I can conclude that that is in all probability a fact because of the prior knowledge that I have gained through experience.

For secondary knowledge I try to verify the information through reliable sources. If I ask a friend, that I know and trust how many times he had to pee after drinking 12 beers and he says;"5". Then I will accept that as fact because I have done the same thing before, but not necessarily at the same time.

Beyond that then my skepticism grows exponentially the farther away from my ability to verify the facts.

If you claim that you had to pee 7 times then I will allow for the possibility of such an occurrence because it is close to what I have already verified.

If however; you claim that you peed 100 times then I would have very little faith in that being a fact. Mainly because it is so far beyond the realm of my experience, or that of others that I may know of that do have a total similar to mine. Even if it is published in a textbook and it has been in there for 30 years that you peed a 100 times I cannot accept it as fact. I can only relay the information and then let others draw their own conclusions.

So in the end what it really comes down to is, who can drink the most beer, and then pee the furthest up on the wall.

That's about as close to "mainstream" as I tend to get




posted on Mar, 29 2006 @ 06:14 AM
link   
Okay, you're cool.
(Although beer is probably not the best idea, at least it's useful for something
)

So, what do you know? Perhaps another thread where you can share your accumulated knowledge about something other than ..ahem...beer? Gotta be a know-it-all in there somewhere. Pontificate on something ..interesting, though. Don't need useless info for 5000. Need useful info for free. lol



posted on Mar, 29 2006 @ 06:34 AM
link   
I had to quit doing that pontification stuff.

I "talk with my hands".

Ticked off a few Catholics because I kept giving them the Pope's "excommunication wave".

They thought I was trying to toss them out of the Catholic church.

I thought that I was trying to tell them a story about the time a friend of mine rode his Harley through the local university while he was naked, in broad daylight, and NOBODY NOTICED!!!

I wondered why they kept looking at my hand kind of funny like while I was talking.

Didn't see much future in pontificating after that.

All I know is chicks, beer and motorcycles.

(And how to wave ya out of the Catholic church).



posted on Mar, 29 2006 @ 07:19 AM
link   
Funny example, well funny to me anyway, one poster who shall remain anonymous severely attacked me one day, claiming superiority of intelligence instead of trying to attack my written statements.

I won't go heavily into it because in my opinion as soon as you start to write about your own intellectual capacity you're really just showing how conceited and self important you are, but this poster then tried to finish her attack but stating how high her I.Q was, which actually turned out to be 20 points lower than mine...

I find that when someone is blatantly wrong and making a fool out of themselves, the best way to deal with it is just ignore them, anyone else in the know will also realise so anyway, and this way, you're not lowering yourself to their level.

There's no point trying to argue with a moron, so take the moral highground...


PS - I sure hope I don't come off sounding like an opinionated wanker.....



posted on Mar, 29 2006 @ 09:50 AM
link   
Prior to joining ATS, I was an unsullied forum virgin. I knew from reading other forums that this place was unique. I lurked for a long time, selfishly enjoying the entertainment, wit, and intelligent discourse without adding to it. Why? Because it was intimidating. I was convinced I could never contribute to the process without being proven a fool. You know the saying, better to keep your mouth shut.....instead of opening it and proving it.....

So I finally decided, the heck with it, I'm joining...it's anonymous, what harm could there be? Turns out, I really care how my written ideas and thoughts are received. Then I read a thread of this type and wonder....Uh oh, did I prove it? I sincerely hope not.

I have noticed an odd occurence. I call it the drive-by post...a poster will drop a couple of paragraphs into a thread, possibly making some very good points...and never returning to rebut the response...why is that? One more thing...why do so many posters comment about and discredit the method used to arrive at a conclusion, instead of the actual conclusion? I don't know if I'm expressing myself correctly....its like, the discussion morphs into the process of discussing or debating and not the content.

One more thought...Please read the entire thread before responding. Please.

NC



posted on Mar, 29 2006 @ 09:54 AM
link   
Brilliant post Gemwolf.

I am 16 years old, and frankly I feel like a fool among people who are superior to me in everything that involves a brain. This is one of the reasons I stopped posting for a long time. I just feel inferior. But one thing that I have got is curiosity, and I joined ATS to ask questions and learn from other people's posts. Credit to ATS, it is where I first heard of relativity and quantum mechanics and much more, and since then I have been looking into them on the Internet.



posted on Mar, 29 2006 @ 10:22 AM
link   
this is all i need to say:
You have voted Gemwolf for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have one more vote left for this month.



posted on Mar, 29 2006 @ 10:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by RecDude
"I will show him", thus he then proceeds to rip out a 30 minute blistering guitar solo that just blows out a bunch of noise without it really being music.

Hey.

That solo was 25 minutes, tops.




top topics



 
1
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join