I never had anyone on ignore before I learned this

[robosmith]

As explained by Helen Mirren on FB.

Quote

Helen Mirren once said: Before you argue with someone, ask yourself, is that person even mentally mature enough to grasp the concept of a different perspective. Because if not, there's absolutely no point.

Not every argument is worth your energy. Sometimes, no matter how clearly you express yourself, the other person isn’t listening to understand—they’re listening to react. They’re stuck in their own perspective, unwilling to consider another viewpoint, and engaging with them only drains you.

There’s a difference between a healthy discussion and a pointless debate. A conversation with someone who is open-minded, who values growth and understanding, can be enlightening—even if you don’t agree. But trying to reason with someone who refuses to see beyond their own beliefs? That’s like talking to a wall. No matter how much logic or truth you present, they will twist, deflect, or dismiss your words, not because you’re wrong, but because they’re unwilling to see another side.

Maturity isn’t about who wins an argument—it’s about knowing when an argument isn’t worth having. It’s realizing that your peace is more valuable than proving a point to someone who has already decided they won’t change their mind. Not every battle needs to be fought. Not every person deserves your explanation.

Sometimes, the strongest thing you can do is walk away—not because you have nothing to say, but because you recognize that some people aren’t ready to listen. And that’s not your burden to carry.

-

How do you determine when a conversation has shifted from a healthy discussion to a futile debate?

the strongest thing you can do is walk away—not because you have nothing to say, but because you recognize that some people aren’t ready to listen.

LIARS are never ready to listen. They are just here to beat you over the head with their NONSENSE and INSULTS.

That is why I have 4 on ignore now.

[Nationalist]

3 minutes ago, robosmith said:

As explained by Helen Mirren on FB.

the strongest thing you can do is walk away—not because you have nothing to say, but because you recognize that some people aren’t ready to listen.

LIARS are never ready to listen. They are just here to beat you over the head with their NONSENSE and INSULTS.

That is why I have 4 on ignore now.

I don't use "ignore". I find it childish and cowardly.

[robosmith]

26 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

I don't use "ignore". I find it childish and cowardly.

I find it huge waste of time suck. 

You just respond with BANKRUPTCY and "Yes Dear."

Can't get more cowardly than that.

[impartialobserver]

Ignore is like cutting down on the number of channels that you surf through. Why have channels 8, 10, and 12 when you will never watch them?

[Michael Hardner]

53 minutes ago, robosmith said:

As explained by Helen Mirren on FB.

the strongest thing you can do is walk away—not because you have nothing to say, but because you recognize that some people aren’t ready to listen.

LIARS are never ready to listen. They are just here to beat you over the head with their NONSENSE and INSULTS.

That is why I have 4 on ignore now.

Now you're learning. 

There are people I can't discuss anything with, because they see discussion that something different than what I see it as. 

 

I never think that I know everything and I have nothing to learn. I never think that it's a contest 

 

But a lot of people think that. I'll be discussing something and then they'll say something about winning? Winning what? 

 

It's not sports, it's about learning. And if you just want to keep repeating the same thing over and over again and never acknowledge a point, why should I waste my time?

[Nationalist]

41 minutes ago, robosmith said:

I find it huge waste of time suck. 

You just respond with BANKRUPTCY and "Yes Dear."

Can't get more cowardly than that.

😘

[gatomontes99]

I mean it is so very typical leftist to ignore differing views. It plays to their tendencies. They tend to ignore voter sentiment when it disagrees with them and then call that democracy or an attack on democracy depending on who won the election. They also tend to ignore data, theories and science that doesn't play to their ideology. They enjoy sounding chambers that do nothing but repeat preferred ideological theories. As a result, they would prefer to dismiss any dissenting opinions or facts by degrading those that oppose them.

 

[Nationalist]

11 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

I mean it is so very typical leftist to ignore differing views. It plays to their tendencies. They tend to ignore voter sentiment when it disagrees with them and then call that democracy or an attack on democracy depending on who won the election. They also tend to ignore data, theories and science that doesn't play to their ideology. They enjoy sounding chambers that do nothing but repeat preferred ideological theories. As a result, they would prefer to dismiss any dissenting opinions or facts by degrading those that oppose them.

 

Yup.

Just ask @Michael Hardner...

[WestCanMan]

3 hours ago, robosmith said:

As explained by Helen Mirren on FB.

Did you honestly have to read a Helen Mirren post to realize that you're incapable of believing anything that you didn't see on CNN?

[WestCanMan]

4 hours ago, Nationalist said:

I don't use "ignore". I find it childish and cowardly.

Ignoring people like robo, EF, myata and eyeball isn't childish or cowardly. They're dime-a-dozen cultists who are incapable of critical thought.

Robo still thinks that cognitive dissonance means that you're not taking anything into consideration unless it meshes with your own biases ffs. There's no way that you can explain that to him, or what confirmation bias is. And the dictionary doesn't help.

When people reject the dictionary as heresy, it's time to move on. 

That's not to say that you can never punch down on them, it's just not healthy to roll in the muck with them every day. 

You become the average of the people you associate with the most, so it's actually important to shut people out if they're bringing your average down by that much. 

[gatomontes99]

6 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Ignoring people like robo, EF, myata and eyeball isn't childish or cowardly. They're dime-a-dozen cultists who are incapable of critical thought.

Robo still thinks that cognitive dissonance means that you're not taking anything into consideration unless it meshes with your own biases ffs. There's no way that you can explain that to him, or what confirmation bias is. And the dictionary doesn't help.

When people reject the dictionary as heresy, it's time to move on. 

That's not to say that you can never punch down on them, it's just not healthy to roll in the muck with them every day. 

You become the average of the people you associate with the most, so it's actually important to shut people out if they're bringing your average down by that much. 

But you aren't talking to them. You are talking to the third party that reads the debate and maybe never actually posts. They are the ones that can be reasoned with.

[robosmith]

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

Did you honestly have to read a Helen Mirren post to realize that you're incapable of believing anything that you didn't see on CNN?

You just keep embarrassing YOURSELF with your OBSESSION with CNN when you have no idea what you're talking about.

[robosmith]

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

Ignoring people like robo, EF, myata and eyeball isn't childish or cowardly. They're dime-a-dozen cultists who are incapable of critical thought.

Robo still thinks that cognitive dissonance means that you're not taking anything into consideration unless it meshes with your own biases ffs. There's no way that you can explain that to him, or what confirmation bias is. And the dictionary doesn't help.

When people reject the dictionary as heresy, it's time to move on. 

That's not to say that you can never punch down on them, it's just not healthy to roll in the muck with them every day. 

You become the average of the people you associate with the most, so it's actually important to shut people out if they're bringing your average down by that much. 

I already showed you the definition of cognitive dissonance to which I REFER.

AI Overview

Learn more

 

In psychology, cognitive dissonance describes the psychological discomfort or tension a person feels when their actions, beliefs, or values conflict with each other, or when new information contradicts existing beliefs. This tension motivates people to reduce the conflict and restore consistency, often through changes in attitudes, behavior, or by rationalizing the inconsistency. 

 

The thing you don't understand is there are multiple definitions. Duh

The other thing you don't understand is you're not nearly as smart as you believe yourself to be. LMAO

You never answered my query about you working in the fossil fuel industry. I have to wonder if you even went to college.

[WestCanMan]

9 hours ago, robosmith said:

I already showed you the definition of cognitive dissonance to which I REFER.

AI Overview

Learn more

 

In psychology, cognitive dissonance describes the psychological discomfort or tension a person feels when their actions, beliefs, or values conflict with each other, or when new information contradicts existing beliefs. This tension motivates people to reduce the conflict and restore consistency, often through changes in attitudes, behavior, or by rationalizing the inconsistency. 

 

The thing you don't understand is there are multiple definitions. Duh

The other thing you don't understand is you're not nearly as smart as you believe yourself to be. LMAO

You never answered my query about you working in the fossil fuel industry. I have to wonder if you even went to college.

You see the words, but they don't register in your brain correctly.

In your opinion, people experience cognitive dissonance because they refuse to allow their closely held beliefs to be challenged, BUT IT'S THE EXACT OPPOSITE. People experience cognitive dissonance precisely because they are allowing conflicting beliefs to fight for dominance. 

People who look at things objectively -> experience cognitive dissonance. Period. By contrast, people who give in to their own confirmation bias don't feel cognitive dissonance because they steadfastly refuse to allow unwanted information to take root.

 

Here's an example of confirmation bias at work: 

A braindead cultist watches CNN, and sees Fauci come on the TV saying that covid originated in a wetmarket when a bat infected with the coronavirus managed to pass it along to a pangolin, or some other intermediary species, and then that mutated virus managed to infect a human.

That explanation seems plausible, and it came from a source that the braindead cultist follows religiously, so that information is put on a golden altar inside the braindead cultist's cranial sewer, inside the shape of a pentagram, basking in the warmth of holy candles, with the strong odour of incense blocking out infection. 

Then a conflicting message comes along, saying that the virus might have come from a BSL4 lab just a few blocks away, but CNN and the scant few other sources that the braindead cultist follows all say "REJECT THAT INFORMATION: IT IS HERESY!" so the braindead cultist instantly goes into denial mode and shouts down the nasty heretics who keep floating that new possibility. "FOS NEWS WIES!😭", he shouts defiantly.  "FOS NEWS WIES!😭"

Then, upon hearing that people who say "BSL4 lab in Wuhan" are getting kicked off of social media, the braindead cultist doesn't say "that's not a good look in a society that holds freedom of speech in high regard", he celebrates the suppression of unwanted ideas, and allows it to warm the cockles of his heart. The bad idea has now gone away, and the braindead cultist is flush with pride.

So what happens when Fauci ends up testifying in congress, in a heated exchange with Rand Paul, and ends up admitting that he funded research in that BSL4 lab to make the bat coronavirus transmissible among humans? 😱

DANG, BRUH! If that information gets inside the Iron Dome of Dumb it's gonna do some damage. It's gonna go straight to that altar and say "Step aside pangolin breath, there's room for two of us here. Let's work this out." In other words, it's gonna cause some "cognitive dissonance".

What's worse, it's gotta make a person wonder if Fauci was just covering his own ass when he chanted "bat>pangolin>human is the way and the light", because it would look really bad for Fauci if the bat coronavirus that's now transmissible among humans (and killing them) is the bat coronavirus that was made transmissible among humans by the research that Fauci funded himself. Right? No pangolin required, just one mad scientist... 

Enter "confirmation bias DEFCON 1", baby. "PEW! PEW! PEWWWW!!!". Nasty, bad ideas are shot from the skies like dodo birds going up against a massive battery of anti-aircraft guns. 1) Don't watch the video. 2) Call Rand Paul a liar. 3) Pass off the information about the existence of an unwanted strain of the virus as more heresy, and 4) don't even listen to Fauci's denials, because that's akin to accepting this new, heretical thought. Just stick to the original script at all times.

So at the end of the day, braindead cultist doesn't experience any cognitive dissonance, because his confirmation bias went scorched-earth on all of the inconvenient truths.

To this day, braindead cultist has never given any weight to the possibility that Fauci's own virus killed all those people, and with that unwanted thought frozen out of his brain, he never has to question Fauci's motives, or the veracity of any other information that Fauci passed along. Other Faucian narratives still reign supreme in the braindead cultist's head:

• "only a covid vaccine can save us from societal collapse" - so sayeth Fauci
• "young adults and kids need it" - so sayeth Fauci
• "alternatives make covid worse, so taking medications that have been used safely for 60 years is suddenly not safe, but we know in advance that the mRNA jabs will be safe" - so sayeth Fauci
• "See? The covid jabs are safe. Ignore the conspiracy theorists" - so sayeth Fauci
• "you don't have to worry about covid if you have the jab" - so sayeth Fauci
• "you won't give granny covid if you have the jab" - so sayeth Fauci
• "we need to force people to take the jab, because jabbed people can't spread covid, that's science" - so sayeth Fauci

Fauci's narratives are still uncontested in the cranial sewers of millions of braindead cultists. 100%.

It took months and months of thousands upon thousands of vaxed people dying for people like eyeball and ex-flyer to admit that even one multi-vaxed person died of covid. "Yeah but they were elderly with comorbidities!!!" 😂

Class dismissed.

Edited March 12 by WestCanMan

[Michael Hardner]

8 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Yup.

Just ask @Michael Hardner...

Who said that I ignore people I disagree with?

I posted WHY I put people on IGNORE, but these posts didn't acknowledge that.

 

They -> IGNORED <- something because they didn't want to hear it, not because I wouldn't engage with them...

[Nationalist]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

Who said that I ignore people I disagree with?

I posted WHY I put people on IGNORE, but these posts didn't acknowledge that.

 

They -> IGNORED <- something because they didn't want to hear it, not because I wouldn't engage with them...

Mike...you were going to create a thread for us to discuss...I don't even remember what it was...but you didn't follow through. Why?

I don't ignore people. Not even @robosmith...who's not the most rational person on the planet. I find the idea contrary to the whole point of a site like this. However...I've seen you advise others to use the ignore function.

You are...in my view...a contradiction.

[Nationalist]

9 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Ignoring people like robo, EF, myata and eyeball isn't childish or cowardly. They're dime-a-dozen cultists who are incapable of critical thought.

Robo still thinks that cognitive dissonance means that you're not taking anything into consideration unless it meshes with your own biases ffs. There's no way that you can explain that to him, or what confirmation bias is. And the dictionary doesn't help.

When people reject the dictionary as heresy, it's time to move on. 

That's not to say that you can never punch down on them, it's just not healthy to roll in the muck with them every day. 

You become the average of the people you associate with the most, so it's actually important to shut people out if they're bringing your average down by that much. 

True but, as I've said to Mike, it defeats the purpose of the site.

Edited March 12 by Nationalist

[Michael Hardner]

23 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Mike...you were going to create a thread for us to discuss...I don't even remember what it was...but you didn't follow through. Why?

I don't ignore people. Not even @robosmith...who's not the most rational person on the planet. I find the idea contrary to the whole point of a site like this. However...I've seen you advise others to use the ignore function.

You are...in my view...a contradiction.

I do recall creating a thread for some topic or other months ago. In good faith, maybe one of us missed it? 

If someone posted just pure garbage and didn't even respond to your posts, would you read them? If so I admire the amount of free time you have. I just get nothing out of it. 

 

I don't advise people to use ignore against those they disagree with, that would be crazy. 

 

The contradiction is what I pointed out... I have posted my reasons for this and they are ignored by people who don't use the actual ignore function. Explain that one to me. 🤔

[Nationalist]

2 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

I do recall creating a thread for some topic or other months ago. In good faith, maybe one of us missed it? 

If someone posted just pure garbage and didn't even respond to your posts, would you read them? If so I admire the amount of free time you have. I just get nothing out of it. 

 

I don't advise people to use ignore against those they disagree with, that would be crazy. 

 

The contradiction is what I pointed out... I have posted my reasons for this and they are ignored by people who don't use the actual ignore function. Explain that one to me. 🤔

I would say they likely feel similar to me.

If the 2 sides can't talk freely to each other, how can society heal? How can this culture war, you hate so much, end?

Would the death of Trump do it? You should understand he's only a figurehead for a large movement to restore sanity.

[Iceni warrior]

20 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

I would say they likely feel similar to me.

If the 2 sides can't talk freely to each other, how can society heal? How can this culture war, you hate so much, end?

Would the death of Trump do it? You should understand he's only a figurehead for a large movement to restore sanity.

There's a difference between talking to each other and talking past each other.

If you avoid addressing someone's points and just talk over them you aren't having a conversation you are preaching.

[Deluge]

15 hours ago, robosmith said:

As explained by Helen Mirren on FB.

the strongest thing you can do is walk away—not because you have nothing to say, but because you recognize that some people aren’t ready to listen.

LIARS are never ready to listen. They are just here to beat you over the head with their NONSENSE and INSULTS.

That is why I have 4 on ignore now.

Helen Mirren is probably a f*cking lib which means she's anti-American and she embraces criminal behavior. That, of course, is the true foundation to rational discourse, right robowoke? 

[Hodad]

15 hours ago, impartialobserver said:

Ignore is like cutting down on the number of channels that you surf through. Why have channels 8, 10, and 12 when you will never watch them?

Nah, in the TV analogy it's more like when Tivo rolled out ad skipping. So you can see content you want without the pointless time wasters you don't. Why clutter your screen with things--or people--that don't have value? Helen Mirren is wise.

Edited March 12 by Hodad

[Legato]

4 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Who said that I ignore people I disagree with?

I posted WHY I put people on IGNORE, but these posts didn't acknowledge that.

 

They -> IGNORED <- something because they didn't want to hear it, not because I wouldn't engage with them...

Cmon Mike you had me on and off "ignore" so many times I felt like a pair of whores drawers.

Ignore is just an example of weak avoidance. 

[WestCanMan]

6 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Helen Mirren is wise.

Mirren was a vaxtard herself, so she's actually one of the people she was talking about. 

A broken clock is right twice a day. End of story. 

[Legato]

16 hours ago, robosmith said:

As explained by Helen Mirren on FB.

the strongest thing you can do is walk away—not because you have nothing to say, but because you recognize that some people aren’t ready to listen.

LIARS are never ready to listen. They are just here to beat you over the head with their NONSENSE and INSULTS.

That is why I have 4 on ignore now.

Don't you usually take advice from the actors on CNN or MSNBC, why now consulting Hollywood?