Drama Alert! Another YTber is calling us a cult! 😈☦️

[Elliott]

6 hours ago, Jirh said:

I honestly have no idea who you're implying.

 

Sorry, @Carl-Richard and @zurew . They're generally-terrible people actually.

Edited 5 hours ago by Elliott

[Jirh]

@Elliott Actually, these two in particular are some of my favourite people here. I especially like the structure of their logic and how they gradually break down and present their arguments.

[Elliott]

1 minute ago, Jirh said:

@Elliott Actually, these two in particular are some of my favourite people here. I especially like the structure of their logic and how they gradually break down and present their arguments.

That's how toxicity usually works.

[Jirh]

4 minutes ago, Elliott said:

That's how toxicity usually works.

So everyone we like is toxic? That doesn't make sense.

Actually, I have disagreed with both of them on different occasions, and we still engage in a neutral way. I don't understand why you are feeling this strongly about them.

[Elliott]

Just now, Jirh said:

So everyone we like is toxic? That doesn't make sense.

No

[Sugarcoat]

The way you guys's profiles shift shaping as one scrolls is kinda trippy 

Edited 6 hours ago by Sugarcoat

[Jirh]

@Sugarcoat

How perceptive!!

[Natasha Tori Maru]

I love disagreeing with people I like. We should be comfortable with ambiguity and discerning subtle differences. Intellectual maturity. 

When someone can argue a crazy outlandish point with sound argument, internal consistency and transparent logic - I kinda love it. It's like "they are serving up this delicious horseshit with the ultimate garnishes and aesthetics, it's still horseshit, but the presentation is immaculate" 

The truth usually arrives with a bunch of bullshit anyway. The wheat is always being sorted from the chaff. Maybe I just like the process as much as the end result ╮⁠(⁠＾⁠▽⁠＾⁠)⁠╭

[Jirh]

@Natasha Tori Maru

The experience of being accepted through disagreement is likely the highest form of human connection. It signals presence and deep care.

For me, what it communicates is: "I am with you, and I will support you whether or not we share the same perception. My disagreement with you is my way of looking out for you."

But ego and lack of trust often get in the way. And most people don't have the prerequisites for such a way of communication, like critical thinking skills or high consciousness, even when they come from a good place. And then we have a broad layer of logical fallacies that most people are not even aware of, which kills effective communication.

It's extremely rare to have someone with whom it is safe to disagree with, let alone enjoyable or beneficial.

1 hour ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

It's like "they are serving up this delicious horseshit with the ultimate garnishes and aesthetics, it's still horseshit, but the presentation is immaculate" 

This line is gold, by the way. It suggests you value the craft even when you reject the conclusion, which is its own kind of intellectual generosity. You're not just tolerating the process; you're savoring it. That's rare too.

Edited 5 hours ago by Jirh

[Joshe]

@Jirh I see it as high Need for Cognition + relatively low identity fusion (perceiving thoughts as objects separate from the self). Ideas are much easier to work with when they aren't intertwined with the self. 

If you have this combo, disagreement is more like intellectual catnip than it is threatening/attacking, but it's easy to forget others aren't operating this way. 

Edited 2 hours ago by Joshe

[Jirh]

@Joshe I see it the same way 💯

Although, it wasn't always like that, and it's still relatively easy to get immersed in the topic and forget the ultimate point of human well-being. But I'm improving as I'm learning to keep my identity separate from my ideas.

 

[Joshe]

1 hour ago, Jirh said:

it's still relatively easy to get immersed in the topic and forget the ultimate point of human well-being

True.