something to remember when repeating conspiracies and spreading rumors

My step father e-mailed me this last night. after reading it, I think that it would be wrong for me not to post this up here. With all the conspiracies and rumors floating around these days, it's easy to get caught up in the crowd and start spreading things with that really aren't based on any facts or aren't proven.


anyway, I think it's in everyone's best interest to take the time to read this little story:


Keep this philosophy in mind the next time you hear, or are out to repeat a rumor.

In ancient Greece (469 - 399 BC), Socrates was widely
lauded for his wisdom. One day the great philosopher
came upon an acquaintance, who ran up to him excitedly
and said, "Socrates, do you know what I just heard about
one of your students...?"

"Wait a moment," Socrates replied. "Before you tell
me, I'd like you to pass a little test. It's called
the Test of Three."

"Test of Three?"

"That's correct," Socrates continued.

"Before you talk to me about my student let's take a
moment to test what you're going to say. The first
test is Truth. Have you made absolutely sure that what
you are about to tell me is true?"

"No," the man replied, "actually I just heard about it."

"All right," said Socrates. "So you don't really know
if it's true or not. Now let's try the second test,
the test of Goodness. Is what you are about to tell me
about my student something good?"

"No, on the contrary..."

"So," Socrates continued, "you want to tell me
something bad about him even though you're not certain
it's true?"

The man shrugged, a little embarrassed.
Socrates continued, "You may still pass though because
there is a third test - the filter of Usefulness. Is what you
want to tell me about my student going to be useful to me?"

"No, not really..."

"Well," concluded Socrates, "if what you want to tell
me is neither True nor Good nor even Useful, why tell
it to me at all?"

The man was defeated and ashamed and said no more.

This is the reason Socrates was a great philosopher
and held in such high esteem.

It also explains why Socrates never found out that
Plato was banging his wife.

I love what you just wrote and it is so true.

I do get frustrated here because so many posters don't check their facts and an unimportant post makes it to the front page just with people discrediting it.

Yet, as you said, if it isn't spoken, you may never know. Just check the facts first.

S&F. Wonderful reminder.

Originally posted by Redajin

It also explains why Socrates never found out that
Plato was banging his wife.

Like Socrates , i didn`t see that coming.

Great story . Thanks for bringing it to my attention.

I really enjoyed that.

Thanks for bringing it up, and something to keep in mind for all of us, to an extent.

What a great post, very refreshing! I think that is a little gem of wisdom that I am unlikely to forget, thatnks for sharing.

Though I am unsure why you added the comment about his wife....
Do you know if it is true?
I don't see it as being good...
And was completely useless.....
But it's gonna make alot of people laugh like it did me!

reply to post by Redajin






Nice reminder. . . .

Redajin, you made my day! Thanks! The joke is cute, but the lesson behind it is SO important! Especially for ATS, where our goal is to deny ignorance.

least we forget that he was executed for speaking his 'truths'

Haha, that last bit at the end is hilarious.

Nice one

Jacob

reply to post by Redajin


I have heard this in one form or another many time, yet never with quite the same ending.

It also explains why Socrates never found out that Plato was banging his wife.

Yes, it is true that passing on rumors, or the game called Chinese Whispers is negative.

Which is why I try to confirm what I hear, base it on experience and knowledge, and then form my opinion.

A good example would be the often mentioned "New World Order" in that I figured out that it actually does not exist, it is a set of keywords, set up as a false-flag in order to make people discredit themseleves, and through the action of speaking about it the person first discredits themselves, secondly they initiate the counteraction to their "rebelling" against it by setting the plans into motion that will eventually stop them to begin with.

Example by phone conversation :

Jimmy Joe : I heard that the New World Order is gonna take away our weapons.

Billy Bob : Like hell they will, we gonna get them guns and build us a bunker.

Jimmy Joe : I head that there New World Order was gonna label us terrorist if we do that.

Billy Bob : That's nonsense, we're American's and we got us some rights.

Jimmy Joe : But what about when F.E.M.A. declares Martial Law?

Billy Bob : Well, we get us some fertilizer and a truck.

In essence, by believing in the false dichotomy of the New World Order and spreading the lie, you create the very need to stop you and anyone connected to you.

Why not try a non-violent approach to doing something about those in power instead?

How To Overthrow Your Own Government, Legally and Without Violence, In Order To Survive


[edit on 5-9-2009 by SpartanKingLeonidas]

reply to post by Redajin

It also explains why Socrates never found out that
Plato was banging his wife.

What do you think the man was trying to tell him in the first place!

Nothing like being the deaf, dumb and blind kid that can play a mean pinball or those three little monkeys, see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil, yet most people are in fact deaf, dumb and blind when it comes to the evil and bad that surrounds us in life.

No news is good news and how we love to attack the messenger when it’s not a message that has found receptive ears, most especially here on ATS.

While it’s a cute email there is little chance Socrates would have framed one of his teachings in such a way. So there is an excellent chance that the email itself violates the very same tenants it cutely rails against.

Idle gossip is just that but it’s ultimately up to the individual to determine what’s gossip and what’s gospel and they sure can’t when someone hasn’t first passed or preached it.

Gossip is often passed by those who lack the social skills or have the mental and financial ability to access all the pertinent information, but the gossip sometimes reaches those that do.

If you had to say investigate the Rockefeller clan from the late 1800’s on, following a trail that crisscrossed the globe through dozens and dozens of corporations and fronts that spanned a period of over a hundred years to arrive at a truth that is still going to be subjective could you, would you?

This is not an accusation against the Rockefeller clan by the way (this is though, dirty, lousy, no good thieving, murdering, manipulative cretins) but you get my point.

Gossip is a two edged sword, there is good gossip (The Rockefellers are saintly, they endow the arts, and sciences and humanity and their generosity has led to many breakthroughs in medicine that has saved lives!) that sometimes negates the bad gossip.

In reality what the man was trying to do was to ‘object’ to Socrates about his student. Objections are always a request for more information and a chance for people to share more information.

The man might have been entirely wrong about his concerns over the student and Socrates intimate knowledge of the student might have once shared led to the man having a far different opinion of the student and shed some far better light on his concerns.

Yet because he never shared it, because he was dissuaded from communicating he likely went away still unconvinced about the student’s virtue, but with the added benefit attached of being less convinced about his own virtue in the process.

There are no stupid questions, or stupid accusations, there are though stupid people who would love to shut down the communication process and the learning process that goes along with it.

That’s all that happened in this story and the moral of the story really is that it bit Socrates on the ass for basically what is essence being to clever for your own good.

This is what is truly clever:

2 heads are better than 1 and 3 heads are better than 2.

It is that communication process that puts other heads to work on the problem, which once combined in the mutual endeavor have a far better chance at arriving at the truth or a solution than any one head alone.

This is not wisdom in this email but an entreaty to avoid engaging in the process that leads to it. That process is called communication and the world is in the situation it is in, because far too many people keep their mouths shut, far too many people feel no news is good news, and far too many people prefer to hear no evil, see no evil, or speak no evil, and the only thing it takes for evil to succeed is for good people to turn their back to it and do nothing about it.

Good sound advice from your step father.

I sometimes wonder when reading some of the threads here if the O.P. actually believes what he or she is writing.

Its one thing when an OP makes a case using an assumption or rumor. I enjoy those threads and even agree with many of them. If you can present evidence to substantiate your claim; more power to you.

On the other hand when you come on here and use wiki, or Joe's backyard blog, or something else that stupid to cite your evidence you are making a fool out of yourself. And that's the part I wonder about. I wonder if some of these people are that weak minded themselves that they actually believe the Monday entry to Joe's backyard blog.

That in itself is in fact a scary thought; however, if you read onward into some of these threads, you will find that there are usually a bunch of people that will jump on board. This is what is really scary.

It also explains why Socrates never found out that
Plato was banging his wife.

I think this would allow the information to pass the test of "usefulness."

Maybe that's why Socrates got to spend more time engrossed in philosophical discussions. Plato was distracted and his wife wasn't there to nag him into contemplation about taking out the trash.

Socrates vs Plato