It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Why Are People So Trapped In Their Thoughts?

page: 1

log in


posted on Oct, 12 2008 @ 02:22 AM
Hello ATS community, this is my first topic. I would like to share with you a personal story of mine.

For weeks I have been e-mailing documentaries and mainstream news articles to one of my friends, and discussing them with him every couple of days. On the whole, he seems to believe or at least accept everything I send to him because they are established facts and/or scholarly sources. Whenever I bring up the subjects, he talks to me as if he believes it.

But then there is a disconnect between his beliefs and his actions.

To illustrate my point, he still drinks restaurant water when we go out to eat. Seems innocent enough, right? Well, I have alerted him to the effects of fluoride in the water, and what it can do to you. And every time he drinks it, I say, "Ah, getting your daily dose of fluoride I see," and then he laughs and continues drinking with an abashed grin on his face.

My family is the same way. On one hand they understand the facts, but then they don't want to believe it. I just don't understand why people would willfully live in ignorance.

Anyone want to help explain the mentality, and how one might go about waking people up?

posted on Oct, 12 2008 @ 04:11 AM
I'm not sure what facts you are talking about...

but people have their own different beliefs and they are on different ends of the political spectrum and you'll just have to be tolerant of their belief.

This website is useful in finding out your belief system and you can use it to see how your belief compares with other people's beliefs:

Also, keep in mind that people have different belief systems, for example, you might be an atheist, and someone else might be a believer. Someone might have perfectly logical proof for God, and, you might disbelieve it, because your belief system is different than theirs.

And, facts are open to interpretation.

Also, you might want to understand what subjectivism is first before you get involved into more arguments, so you can understand other sides, and other opposing views.

The basic idea of ethical subjectivism is that moral judgments are fundamentally subjective, i.e. based on feelings. This says nothing about what is right or wrong. So subjectivism does not allow (or forbid) anything, and it is nonsense to talk about how things would be if subjectivism were our guide or were put into practice. So you cannot criticize subjectivism by talking about the bad effects it would have. It is (meant to be) merely a description of the meaning of words such as 'right' and 'wrong'. It either gets the meaning right or it doesn't. So it is true or false, not good or evil.

You might want to understand what viewpoints, are, people have their different viewpoints too. They have their own thoughts. Different from yours. People are presented with the same facts but they have different viewpoints, different ways of viewing the same issue.

Thoughts are important, without thoughts there wouldn't be free speech.

And, Galileo was prosecuted for people not believing in him, because they thought his facts weren't correct. They presented him with the facts of their time, that Earth didn't revolve around the sun, and all of these other false heresys, but, later on Galileo was correct, and, the progress was made. It's thinking like that when you don't accept what other people think that progress is prohibited from happening.

Also, keep an open mind about things... it helps to always understand what's out there, but, also to keep a mind about what's possible. Who knows what is impossible? Don't be so judgmental about what is and what isn't.

I hope that helped.

posted on Oct, 12 2008 @ 04:12 AM
Are you certain that he has accepted your information as true? It seems likely that he believes your assertions to be false but lacks the assertiveness to contradict you. I am projecting myself onto his character, but I imagine I would feel a bit irritated if a friend persisted in sending me information to edify me and didn't take a hint when I chose to continue with my usual habits. While you may find your information to be convincing, your friend may feel otherwise. I have had my fair share of "lessons" on the dangers of fluoride in drinking water, aluminum salts in deodorant, etc., but my own research has led me to different conclusions. It may seem like your friend just doesn't care that he's poisoning himself, but perhaps he doesn't actually agree that he is poisoning himself at all. It may be simpler than that: perhaps he believes the information to be true, but is too lazy to do anything about it. In any case, it is highly presumptuous of you to position yourself as anyone's reformer. I would suggest you either ask him outright if he disagrees with your assertions or just stop sending him information that he is clearly rejecting.

[edit on 12/10/08 by paperplanes]

posted on Oct, 12 2008 @ 11:27 AM
Thank you for your reply paperplanes! You raise some good points, I'll address a few of them.

I am not a very aggressive person when it comes to conversations, and he is the one who asks me to send him news articles and documentaries that I come across. For that reason I don't believe I am irritating him, and for that reason also I'm concerned when he does keep asking me for information. He doesn't seem to take it seriously so I may stop.

Again, I don't send him alternative fringe website articles, I send him scientific journals and MSM sources like AP, Washington Post, etc. I honestly don't think of myself as some savior or reformer haha. I just give out information to my friends who ask for it.

I will ask him though why he asks me to send him news when he doesn't put much stock in what I send him. Thanks again for the reply.

[edit on 12-10-2008 by Viral]

posted on Oct, 13 2008 @ 08:17 AM
The universe is in a constant state of change,
why should people's "beliefs" be any different?

If you were talking about something major, like treating people the way you want to be treated, I can see how a change in that belief would constitute a need for worry. But you're talking about drinking water...

I just saw in the news today, people with Diverticulitis used to be banned from eating foods like nuts and corn because it was thought that those foods irritated the symptoms by becoming lodged into the small outpockets in the lower intestines. Now, these deprived people are told, "Oops, my bad. You can eat that." after all these years of obeying that "belief"?

Let the man drink his water.

posted on Oct, 14 2008 @ 04:04 PM
I'll also point out that our options are pretty limited when it comes to what we drink in a restaurant. Perhaps he has weighed the evidence you've provided him against his budget restraints or against the ecological impact of bottled water and made a choice that way.

Few choices are perfectly black and white, especially with something as complicated as health. While there is evidence that fluoride is bad for you, it's not incontrovertible. And there is lots of evidence that water is good for you, whereas sodas whether sweetened with corn syrup and white sugar or with artificial sweeteners are at least as suspect.

posted on Oct, 14 2008 @ 09:07 PM
Thank you for your reply!

Yes, not drinking anything in a restaurant has been very inconvenient for me, so I can understand sneaking in a drink here and there. My friend is very well off economically, so whether he can afford to buy bottled water etc. shouldn't be a problem for him. Fluoride is a waste product from aluminum processing, and I believe enough evidence is out there to guarantee that it is at least not safe to ingest. When fluoride vapors settled on a town located next to an aluminum plant it nearly killed the whole community. =/

After thinking about it, I think my friend just can't believe it's bad for him. I think he appreciates the information I gave him, but he's been drinking fluoridated water ever since he was a kid and he's still alive, so in his mind he must think it's not as bad as the research suggests. He's very intelligent too, which is sad because if it's true that fluoride lowers someone's IQ by messing with the nervous system, then I just wonder how much more intelligent he'd be if he had never been exposed to the stuff. Probably a genius, like many of us should be.

EDIT : Oh I definitely agree with you about high fructose corn syrup. Disregarding the fact that it's genetically modified, it also jacks up your insulin receptors and can cause diabetes. It's in almost everything, too.

[edit on 14-10-2008 by Viral]

posted on Oct, 14 2008 @ 09:18 PM
reply to post by Viral

You know, most of my friends think i'm nutts. When I start talking about Parabens, Flouride, Aspertame, Ammonium Larueth(l) Sulfate etc... They roll their eyes and call me paranoid.

Some people, just do not see outside the box - and that is their right as humans. To believe whatever they want to believe.

I choose to believe that Flouride is bad for me, I brush with flouride free thoothpaste, I use flouride free mouthwash, and I try my best to find Flouride Free Water. But sometimes at a restaurant, its just not so easy. Ordering a glass of water, instead of a Coke, is a compromise that I will make. The worst water I ever had was at the Tropicana Hotel in Las Vegas - it tasted SO full of chemicals and unnatural. I bought bottled water the entire time in Vegas.

So just as you believe that these things are bad, some people believe that they aren't and that the government, "really does have our best interests at heart."

- Carrot

posted on Oct, 14 2008 @ 11:38 PM
Sounds like more scare tactics to me.
But, to each his own.

posted on Oct, 15 2008 @ 12:14 AM
I don't understand what a 1950's propaganda leaflet has to do with me? I'm not trying to scare my friend, or anyone on this site. If I were, I'd use "hot" words and spruce up my rhetoric.

"Reports show that cyanide will kill you, even in very small doses." - informing

"Damnit, wake up people! Can't you see in front of your faces, the pale specter of Death is laughing in your face as you eat those damned Cheerios!" - scare tactics

Now if I am trying to incite fear rather than inform in any of my posts, kindly underline the specific phrases and explain. Otherwise, your comment is insulting and a cop-out remark. =/

posted on Oct, 15 2008 @ 08:50 AM

Originally posted by Viral
I don't understand what a 1950's propaganda leaflet has to do with me?

I'm going to presume you were speaking to me?
What does a 1950's propaganda have to do with this?
You're gasping over fluoride the way that propaganda tried to make people gasp, only you're using a softer method. "Hot words"? We all know there are many ways to get a message out. Fearmongering is fearmongering, whether you're using a soft glove or a brick.

One minute the mainstream is putting out that fluoride is essential to your teeth, the next we're hearing it can damage your nervous system? I read up on the amounts that can do damage, it's the same as taking in too much iron, you just need to be careful not to swallow your toothpaste spit and, if your town induces fluoride into your water, try not to drink too much of it in combination to fluoride containing foods.

The definition of 'excessive' in the context of fluorosis falls on the order of parts per million (ppm) and is generally accepted to mean significantly higher than the 0.7 to 1.2 ppm amounts recommended for fluoridated water. Fluoride in small amount is considered by most dentists to be beneficial to teeth (see Fluoride therapy).

But it isn't going to do as much harm as scaremongers and gaspers would like people to believe. Bring awareness, that's fine, but relax a bit. The very air you breath in your big town will harm you quicker, if you want to get scary, should your friend walk around in a gas mask?

[edit on 15-10-2008 by mmariebored]

posted on Oct, 15 2008 @ 03:11 PM
mmariebored, you failed to point to any of my statements which convey a sense of fear mongering. I am completely calm, but since you hold an opposing view you're projecting whatever fear you may have onto me. Have I made any outrageous claims? No. I've said something you don't believe and you resort to ad hominem.

Wikipedia is not a valid source of information. They got that information from the FDA, which is compromised because they have been working in conjunction with aluminum processing plants for decades to dump their wastes into our waters. There is a conflict of interest there.

That is only an introduction to the history of fluoride and its effects. Since you want to label me as a fear monger, listen to what Christopher Bryson, an award winning journalist, has amassed on the subject. These aren't his ideas, either, they're facts that he has assembled. I honestly think you have not studied this subject, and so you think I'm trying to deceive people. In any case, in any future arguments you have with people, try and refrain from ad hominems.

Regardless of what you think of me, I suggest you to watch the video or read up on the subject.

Edit : Iron is a natural part of our diet, so within moderation it is actually essential to our health. Stannous fluoride is not.
[edit on 15-10-2008 by Viral]

[edit on 15-10-2008 by Viral]

posted on Oct, 15 2008 @ 03:35 PM
reply to post by Viral

Hello Viral

I understand HOW you feel, as I've been trying to wake them up for years. I think you just have to realize, as another poster has already said, some just choose to remain asleep. Call it karma or fate or weakness or ignorance or self preservation, the big lesson here is to learn that (especially in the case of your friend who asks for the info) by giving the info, you HAVE done your job. You just can't be the police all the time! My husband doesn't want to know about ANY of this and it's very difficult because we are raising a child together. I walk that line every minute with him and I hate it. But, in every other respect, he's a great guy.

Be the messenger. Don't try to be the enforcer. It's a totally thankless job.

AND I see you're going for enforcement in your most recent post. You've not started this thread to debate the merits of flouride. I will watch the video. I agree with your views on flouride. BUT, that's not the point now, is it?

Be well, and be patient and continue to be the messenger. NOT the enforcer.

posted on Oct, 15 2008 @ 03:45 PM
Sage advice DGgirl, thank you. I went on the defensive because I felt unjustly attacked.

That is a very good point, though. You're only morally obligated to spread the truth and let it be heard, not enforce it. Sometimes I get a little caught up with my friends and family though, because I care about them the most! It's hard to sit by and watch them damage their health so an industry can gain a fraction of a penny off of them.

Good luck with your family, I wish them well!

posted on Oct, 15 2008 @ 03:53 PM
Believe me!! I know how you feel! I've been the family "whack" for years. You just have to get used to ppl laughing at you, because it IS going to happen. There's an old southern saying.... "i'm just sayin" which immediately let's you off the hook. It's a magic indemnity clause. So what if they laugh or whatever. You have done your research. You took the time to follow up. Be content to know that you know.

posted on Oct, 15 2008 @ 10:21 PM
Alright, viral, I apologize. It's just I've seen so much fearmongering about so many different subjects on the internet, in MANY forums. But what are you thinking here, there's a conspiracy to kill off the weak, poor and ignorant or uninformed in our country?

posted on Oct, 15 2008 @ 10:31 PM
I think Viral was just saying that it's frustrating to believe something, have a friend ask for information and seem to share the belief, and then behave in a way that makes clear the friend doesn't believe you.

Which is pretty understandable. I hate it when people "go along" with what I'm saying and I learn later that they actually disagree. If I present an argument and someone sees flaws in it, I wish they would educate me.

In this case I think maybe the friend is more convinced than Viral sees, because I don't think that having an occasional glass of tap water means that you agree with the fluoridation of our water. But I think Viral was just using that as an example (which is why this is in Education and Media, instead of Medical Conspiracies).

posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 09:40 AM

Originally posted by americandingbat
I think Viral was just saying that it's frustrating to believe something, have a friend ask for information and seem to share the belief, and then behave in a way that makes clear the friend doesn't believe you.

Which is pretty understandable. I hate it when people "go along" with what I'm saying and I learn later that they actually disagree. If I present an argument and someone sees flaws in it, I wish they would educate me.

In this case I think maybe the friend is more convinced than Viral sees, because I don't think that having an occasional glass of tap water means that you agree with the fluoridation of our water. But I think Viral was just using that as an example (which is why this is in Education and Media, instead of Medical Conspiracies).

Maybe people "go along" because they are trying to be open to your thoughts. Maybe it isn't that they're pretending at all, just gathering information, learning, discussing etc., until they come to their OWN conclusion on the matter. That process can often take the stance of complete disagreement and flip over once convinced they have all the facts correct. There's nothing wrong with flipping back and forth, it's how we learn. People who aren't flexible shatter when proven wrong.

posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 10:41 PM
Thank you for that honest reply mmariebored, I really appreciate it! No harm done, I understand where you're coming from mate.

All that I gather from my research is that fluoride is not good for you. Why is it put in our waters? At the beginning, when that famous propagandist was used to spread the idea that fluoride was good for you, I think the primary idea was for the companies to avoid lawsuits and to gain a stable and long lasting profit. Did the owners of these aluminum companies and government agencies really want a less intelligent general public? I can't tell you for sure and that's a conclusion you will have to come to yourself. I think the greatest contributor to the problem early on was greed, to be honest.

Now as for the present? I think it's a commonly held belief that it's alright to ingest fluoride, and so no one researches it anymore. Thankfully there are reputable people coming out and sharing their research with the public. Most people who work in the FDA or in Congress just don't know, so I think it ultimately depends on us to talk to our representative and to let them know we are at least concerned, that's how I view it.

Again, no worries mate.

[edit on 16-10-2008 by Viral]

[edit on 16-10-2008 by Viral]

top topics


log in