By the way, Detached interest could be very handy in the field of Politics and dealing with other kinds of media like television, newspapers and the like.

Originally posted by Harman
By the way, Detached interest could be very handy in the field of Politics and dealing with other kinds of media like television, newspapers and the like.

That's exactly what I was going to add to the thread!

I was far too invested in the political discussion for a while. I didn't get too angry, but I found myself feeling frustrated and "invested" in how people felt and responded. What a waste! I learned to take a position of observance, and I have been feeling a lot better.

I am interested, and I post my opinion, but I'm not invested in anyone believing me or agreeing with me. I am detached from the response. It's a Good Thing.

Exactly! With detached interest you don't get the urge to win. It frustrates other people but just don't get sucked in with them to much, i mean discussing a point fervently can be nice and challenging for the brain but keep the emotional attachment out of it.

The way i try to enter a discussion is not with the need to convince my opponent but with seeing the chance to share my opinion with whoever may read it and it takes 90% of the frustration out of the discussion.

[edit on 22-10-2008 by Harman]

It's my suspicion that if people were receiving purely private posts re: political candidates, prophesised alien invasions, etc. and IF the medium delivering these items of information was not inclusive of a forum or other feedback, then in all probability, people would dismiss those items not of interest to them and would read only those that did.

It's to be suspected that the reason people feel compelled to respond (be that 'for' or 'against') is in an attempt to combat what they may well believe to be propaganda/mind-control/deliberately misleading info/agenda existent in fora, chat, etc.

For example, millions of people read daily newspapers on public transport on their way to work, or in their office, in the park, etc. They may totally disagree with the information. Yet few leap from their seat to oppose it, out loud. And the reverse, should they agree enthusiastically with the information.

At most, someone in the train may nudge the person next to them and raise a mocking or impressed eyebrow, regarding something in the newspaper which they may have opened more widely in order the other might see it.

There are publications which cater to those with fervent interest in UFOs etc. But generally speaking, those who purchase such publications don't read them in public.

ATS has a huge number of posts daily dedicated to UFOs and aliens. It's one of the first things that strikes you when you're new to ATS.

If ATS were your primary source of news, you could be forgiven for believing UFOs and intergalactic aliens are proven fact and of vital importance in life generally.

Not everyone who patronizes ATS is necessarily a believer in UFOs and aliens however. Maybe they're on the fence. Or perhaps they're disbelievers.

When confronted with such a plethora of UFO/alien threads, many containing as they do prophecies/predictions, people may finally react testily in the hope of restoring perspective, or perhaps in an attempt to persuade the credible to devote energy to their actual life in equal measure to that which they're devoting to predicted arrival of UFO/aliens. And as the believers of UFOs/aliens are often quite strident in their claims, perhaps others feel the need to respond equally energetically in attempted rebuttal ?

Generally speaking however, I agree with the sentiments expressed in your post

[edit on 22-10-2008 by Dock6]

Thanks Dock6, for your reply.

It is to much to hope that mainstream media will ever be honestly neutral in their reporting so that is a loosing battle, getting angry about it will get you nowhere, or with things like 'birds of a feather flock together' it attracks other angry people that stand beside or against you. If the majority would behave with detached interest and instead of getting getting irritated with (real or percieved) mainstream propaganda just stop following it, stop giving it attention, it would shrivel up and die.

I only see the benefits in it really . So in short we should leave anger/over investment out of the media-equation.

Generally speaking however, I agree with the sentiments expressed in your post

Thanks for the support

i think detached interest is a wonderful thing. i practice it most of the time, as i've learned that remaining completely neutral can lead to some interesting conversations.

granted, i often do have a leaning one way or another about whatever subject is being discussed but ultimately i realize that i am human and as such i am prone to being incorrect or just misinformed. it allows me to be able to more easily communicate with people while also assimilating new information and applying it to my overall scope of what is being discussed.

also, in certain discussions, it allows for the imagination to run wild. concepts that i normally don't even consider can be more easily grasped, even if they are extremely hypothetical situations which border on fantasy or impossibility.


i love to think. i love to learn. i love to feel as if i'm doing what i can to grow as an individual and i think for me, taking a generally neutral stance is best.

Originally posted by Barathrum
granted, i often do have a leaning one way or another about whatever subject is being discussed but ultimately i realize that i am human and as such i am prone to being incorrect or just misinformed. it allows me to be able to more easily communicate with people while also assimilating new information and applying it to my overall scope of what is being discussed.

Thanks for your thoughts Barathrum, it is a very good point you bring up. Leaning to a opinion is a good thing in a discussion because otherwise it would be a very short one but conceding to other valid points in such a discussion will give it way more depth than when both parties stand their ground. It is a society thing to compete rather than to work together towards a common goal, namely the truth. The truth of a matter should never become less important than winning an argument.