Calling Others "Deluded"....

Author: EtrnlVw

Posts

Total: 45
Topic's author
#1
EtrnlVw
EtrnlVw's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,869
3
3
5
EtrnlVw's avatar
EtrnlVw
3
3
5
Labeling others deluded has become a real epidemic in debate and discussion forums and is unproductive by all measures, immature and should be banned as a reference of debate as an accusation of the opposing party. Anyone can claim the other person is deluded and it happens all the time, it gets in the way of productive communication and debate. It should be a universal rule in forums that anyone who stoops to the level of calling others deluded has forfeited their position and is not worthy of intellectual interaction in that exchange. 
It's contrary to intellectual integrity. 


Topic's author
#2
EtrnlVw
EtrnlVw's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,869
3
3
5
EtrnlVw's avatar
EtrnlVw
3
3
5
Do WE want to raise the level of discourse in forums (or this forum) in general? it seems the more serious the topic the more people label others deluded....but is this an intellectual cop-out? I think so, calling others deluded is the perception of the accuser it doesn't always project reality or truth and more than always is an excuse to avoid content, I believe there can be better debate on all sides. This epidemic is nonsense.
#3
Outplayz
Outplayz's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,193
3
3
5
Outplayz's avatar
Outplayz
3
3
5
-->
@EtrnlVw
Oh come on man... this is making you sound weak. I'll be honest with you about that. If someone calls you deluded, protect yourself by coming back at them with information and debate. If they answer without addressing your points, then they are the ones that are deluded. So you can simply stop responding by saying you can't have a conversation with someone that is deluding themselves (or say it nicer or say nothing at all). It works both ways. Plus, to the causal readers, they will be on your side and someone might even jump in and say something to defend you. But that can only happen if you continue to hold your ground and message. It only hurts the person that doesn't reply with logical arguments. 

It is too extreme to ban everyone that calls others deluded. It's a slippery slope. Why? What about calling others ignorant? What about calling someone a dunce? And variations thereof that are said in an indirect way... i.e. that is a dunce thing to say... that is a deluded position... that is an ignorant argument, etc. 

In conclusion, why do you want to have a safe space? That isn't reality. That isn't life. In life you will be offended and hear illogical words. You have to defend yourself not censor and hide. You want this site to only be things you want to hear.. You can't have it your way to be comfortable. You can't expect that people that oppose you should always do so in a logical way bc if they don't you are offended. Learn to be offended and stand up for yourself... not want to censor everyone that offends you. That works against you even if you are right bc it will be viewed as weak and immature.
Topic's author
#4
EtrnlVw
EtrnlVw's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,869
3
3
5
EtrnlVw's avatar
EtrnlVw
3
3
5
-->
@Outplayz
If you like, or endorse calling others deluded then you are weak TBH lol, it's not about me defended it, it's the position of the other that is weak. Because it doesn't allow for honest discourse. Perhaps you should rethink that. I'm not saying ban everyone that says it, I'm saying we should raise the bar of intellectual debate, I'm surprised you didn't get that. What's a safe space? calling others deluded to avoid content or protecting the value of discourse? 
#5
bsh1
bsh1's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 2,589
5
5
8
bsh1's avatar
bsh1
5
5
8
-->
@EtrnlVw
The use of the term deluded may or may not constitute a personal attack depending on the context. If you have concerns about a specific situation, please notify me in private so that I can evaluate the situation and take action if action is appropriate.
Topic's author
#6
EtrnlVw
EtrnlVw's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,869
3
3
5
EtrnlVw's avatar
EtrnlVw
3
3
5
-->
@bsh1
I'm saying the use of the term as an accusation of the other in debate is unproductive in general, when is it not insulting? This is not a call out to any individual, but a topic of consideration. Maybe it should be avoided to stimulate better conversations and debating topics. 
Topic's author
#7
EtrnlVw
EtrnlVw's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,869
3
3
5
EtrnlVw's avatar
EtrnlVw
3
3
5
-->
@Outplayz
You have to defend yourself not censor and hide.

I'd like to see you provide an example of where I "hide". Where have you ever known me to hide from an answer or explanation? 
There is nothing to defend or argue when someone says you are just deluded, they believe there is nothing to argue/debate and it's not an argument at all, it's an insult. Sorry but that's just weak, once again you seem to endorse that in certain instances it's okay to insult people. You can go back to DDO for that.
#8
Outplayz
Outplayz's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,193
3
3
5
Outplayz's avatar
Outplayz
3
3
5
-->
@EtrnlVw
Calling another deluded is another way, or the best way, to say they have been deceived or have a misleading belief. It is a very appropriate word for the religion forum. If the other person decides not to back up why he thinks others are deluded, then he has no argument or position which is a L for him/her. You are being overly sensitive. Calling someone's belief deluded and telling them why you think so is a proper debate and argument... although with a little attitude (which i personally love). If they don't tell you why your position is deluded or can't... then it should be easy pickings. 
Topic's author
#9
EtrnlVw
EtrnlVw's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,869
3
3
5
EtrnlVw's avatar
EtrnlVw
3
3
5
-->
@Outplayz
Calling another deluded is another way, or the best way, to say they have been deceived or have a misleading belief.

That's an opinion and not an argument. 

It is a very appropriate word for the religion forum.

Lol, yeah if you're a troll that likes to avoid clean debate. Sorry that's weak. 

If the other person decides not to back up why he thinks others are deluded, then he has no argument or position

That was my point all along, that's not being sensitive. That's adding value to the forum. 


#10
Outplayz
Outplayz's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,193
3
3
5
Outplayz's avatar
Outplayz
3
3
5
-->
@EtrnlVw
"I believe your spiritual belief is deluded bc it is not founded on anything that can be objectively proven, and furthermore has zero evidence." That is a proper objection to your belief. And... no, i don't see you hide which is why i am stunned right now you want to censor someone instead of putting them in their place. 
#11
bsh1
bsh1's avatar
Debates: 14
Posts: 2,589
5
5
8
bsh1's avatar
bsh1
5
5
8
-->
@EtrnlVw
Just because it is insulting does not make it an insult, per se. The term "delude" means "mistaken," with a connotation implying that the mistake is severe or that its maker willfully overlooks the facts. Calling someone mistaken can be insulting, but it can also be demonstrated (meaning it can be shown to be true or likely true). The truth is an absolute defense in this case. If no effort at demonstration is made, then the accusation of delusion trends towards being a genuine insult.
#12
Outplayz
Outplayz's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,193
3
3
5
Outplayz's avatar
Outplayz
3
3
5
-->
@EtrnlVw
That's an opinion and not an argument. 
That's not an opinion, it is the definition of the word. 

Lol, yeah if you're a troll that likes to avoid clean debate. Sorry that's weak. 
So what? I like to troll sometimes and i like to be trolled sometimes. I can handle it. And if you think i am weak... you have thoroughly deluded yourself for the sake of being right. 

That was my point all along, that's not being sensitive. That's adding value to the forum. 
What is value? Why are you the one to define it? If you want to... define exactly what you think value should be. I actually know who this is in regards to. I had a conversation with him and it ended in "ignorance is bliss" to apply to both of us. We ended on disagreement thinking the other is deluding themselves. I'm fine with that. I will pick up in the future and argue my position and at the same time... i have a little more respect for him for sticking to his position and giving me something to prove. That is value to me. 
Topic's author
#13
EtrnlVw
EtrnlVw's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,869
3
3
5
EtrnlVw's avatar
EtrnlVw
3
3
5
Guys, if we're in a discussion/debate and my reply to your argument or response is that "you're deluded" (or even insinuate it) that means that I believe that whatever you're saying is not true or crazy without me providing justification for it, it's an automatic tap-out, it's not an argument. That means I'm no longer engaged in debate/argument, but declared an unsubstantiated opinion. Again, I've never heard this used in discussions where it's a productive effort or term used. It's usually used as a means to say the other person is believing in nonsense without providing reason for the claim. It would be a nice way of me saying you all are nuts without the threat of being banned. That is weak. 
Topic's author
#14
EtrnlVw
EtrnlVw's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,869
3
3
5
EtrnlVw's avatar
EtrnlVw
3
3
5
Declaring the other person deluded is a subjective opinion, it's not facts or substantiated evidence/proof. Not in the way people use the term in forums, it's an escape route.
Topic's author
#15
EtrnlVw
EtrnlVw's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,869
3
3
5
EtrnlVw's avatar
EtrnlVw
3
3
5
-->
@Outplayz
"I believe your spiritual belief is deluded bc it is not founded on anything that can be objectively proven, and furthermore has zero evidence." That is a proper objection to your belief.

No it's not it's an opinion. First one needs to ask what they're spiritual beliefs are founded on, and what is objective.....before anyone claims "deluded" correct?? What you stated above was an opinion, because I have yet to see the answer of who it was you are objecting to. Tell me I'm wrong...how many times has trash like this gotten in the way of what could have been a productive discussion?

Where have you ever known me to hide from an answer or explanation? 

And... no, i don't see you hide which is why i am stunned right now you want to censor someone instead of putting them in their place. 

Lol, then there is no reason to suggest I'm trying to hide. That's not even a question. Why would you even think that? If I called you deluded I would feel that would be very insulting to you, and I would never do that. Rather I would explain my positions. 


#16
Outplayz
Outplayz's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,193
3
3
5
Outplayz's avatar
Outplayz
3
3
5
-->
@EtrnlVw
I'm not going to argue with you. I already told you my position on the matter. Everyone here isn't under the obligation to behave like you or how you want. If it is malicious and threatening... then you have a point. But if i simply think "religious people" are deluding themselves.. i know enough about organized religion to make that presupposition. That isn't my style. I don't start with that... but, i don't expect everyone to act like me either. It is an opinion i can argue no matter how it comes up. 
#17
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,969
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
You can back up with facts on the claim a person is deluded if that person first laid out a string of false information that they claim is true.

That goes to argumentation though, and this is a debate site where we all just pretend everyone has verifiable information at all times and all venues.

/sarcasm
#18
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@EtrnlVw
I can't help but think you are accusing me of calling someone deluded. I say this because of an offense you took when I stated something that was not intended to be an accusation against anyone.



The first misunderstanding was when you seemed to me to be offended at the idea that there is a hell. This was reaction against me expressing the belief that we all likely deserve hell even if that is not what we get.

The second misunderstanding, was when I was attempting to show an example of hell here on Earth, that is, "those who receive not the love of the truth are cursed with strong delusion" which, besides being a statement of the obvious and possibly redundant, is actually a quote from scripture...

My implication here was not that I was judging anyone to be deluded, but that if anyone, regardless of who they are, embraces delusion over the truth, they are likely to suffer turmoil in this world.

And I sincerely believe this, which is why my only real position is The Truth. I am not here to tear anyone down or condemn. It is my intent to preach the good news of keeping it real.


Something which, you know, I think actually makes debate edifying.


So no, if I am being accused of calling people deluded, that is simply not the case, I am quoting the scripture that says....

<->
"Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and byour gathering together unto him, that ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way. And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth: Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

Now our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and God, even our Father, which hath loved us, and hath given us everlasting consolation and good hope through grace, comfort your hearts, and stablish you in every good word and work."

<->

And to those who are not interested in such things as scripture, religion, and all that... let me translate that into something that anyone who is decent can agree with. Get yourself out of the way, check your pride at the door, because The Truth is what saves you, not wishful thinking or vain imagination. YOU ARE NOT GOD. Keep it real.

Much love to you all, and know that it was never my intention to offend.





#19
Outplayz
Outplayz's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,193
3
3
5
Outplayz's avatar
Outplayz
3
3
5
-->
@Mopac
YOU ARE NOT GOD. 
How do you know? ;p 
#20
Castin
Castin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,238
3
2
7
Castin's avatar
Castin
3
2
7
I do understand where Etrnl is coming from when he says it can be a debate killer. With it you can completely dismiss the words and arguments of your opponent in favor of a mocking "you're crazy", and an implied "you're a fool". And of course, it's charged language that's likely to give offense. I often see it come at the end of an exchange in which frustrations have built to a point where all debate is dead and all that's left is insults.

I would say the emotional content of an accusation of delusion is important, and can vary. It can be a calm if critical observation or an aggressive and contemptuous attack. If backed up by clear arguments and a cerebral rather than hostile tone, I'd consider it acceptable. Though I do question how often it's used like that vs how often it's used nastily. My instinct would be to say that it's used nastily more often. But there are cases where saying someone is deluded can arguably be called an observation of the truth, as in the case of oh, I don't know, flat Earthers. I could see myself calling a moon landing hoaxer deluded during an argument.

It strikes me as very contextual and interpretive, moderation-wise. I'll have to slightly disagree with bsh1 on the deluded = mistaken thing. Deluded is a more loaded and flammable word imo.
#21
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
I know who the delusional are and I know who is not. I am the chosen one.
#22
Earth
Earth's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 3,087
3
4
8
Earth's avatar
Earth
3
4
8
-->
@RationalMadman
lol?
#23
Barney
Barney's avatar
Debates: 53
Posts: 3,463
5
9
10
Barney's avatar
Barney
5
9
10
-->
@EtrnlVw
What you want is "Deluded," to be treated as "Nazi." This seems unlikely.

Let's say pulling the Nazi card is equivalent to First Degree Murder (FDM), and the Deluded card is equivalent to Assault and Battery (AB). If the scale of punishment leads AB being punished to the level of FDM, once someone has committed AB they might as well kill the person to destroy the evidence; given that the punishment cannot be increased with the added crime. In for a penny, in for a pound.

Granted in a debate pulling the Nazi card does not destroy the opponent, it merely destroys your own credibility. The above analogy stands as an example of why scales of punishment to fit the severity of crime are needed.
Topic's author
#24
EtrnlVw
EtrnlVw's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,869
3
3
5
EtrnlVw's avatar
EtrnlVw
3
3
5
-->
@Mopac
I can't help but think you are accusing me of calling someone deluded. I say this because of an offense you took when I stated something that was not intended to be an accusation against anyone.

Nope sorry, you just happen to be one of those who does this, or insinuates it. I've been in this game for a decade, I have been called everything and every insult under the sun and it's really irrelevant I'm just calling for better discourse in this forum. This topic was not brought about by anyone calling me deluded. As I mentioned in the OP this is something I've noticed everywhere in forums and it's just ignorant and meant to insult the other person. I watch others call their opponents deluded and or delusional all the time and it's mostly used to undermine the other person and it's a waste of a response TBH, many times it is used without justification and more of an assumption and a lazy way of getting off having to argue content. I think it would encourage more straight forward debate to do away with it and only trolls do it anyways. DDO would be a perfect example of it getting out of hand and all sides think the other person is deluded altogether so why bring it to discussions? you think they're deluded and delusional and they think you are lol. It's immature.

The first misunderstanding was when you seemed to me to be offended at the idea that there is a hell.

Lol is that supposed to be a joke? my foundation is Christianity and been around this crap all my life I've thought about the idea of hell probably more than you have. I'm not offended by YOUR comment, I'm offended because it's a misconception and it makes others feel like they want no part of God, that's a real shame. 

Topic's author
#25
EtrnlVw
EtrnlVw's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,869
3
3
5
EtrnlVw's avatar
EtrnlVw
3
3
5
-->
@Barney
What you want is "Deluded," to be treated as "Nazi." This seems unlikely.

That's a little extreme dude. I'm just saying we should raise the bar and do away with judging the other person as deluded or delusional without regard for why they believe what they believe, it seems to me to be a subjective opinion about the other person and it makes more mature discussions more difficult than they need be. It's an insult to people's intelligence, for many people I know who have spent a great amount of time and rationale to form their beliefs. 
Often times more than not the person thinks the other is deluded/delusional simply because they may not share the same beliefs, for them it's absurd. But it's just an opinion and serves no real purpose. If someone is deluded it should be easy enough for everyone to see in argument without someone having to make a point in insulting the other. I think we should make this place easy for newcomers to feel like they can join and speak their minds freely and politely no matter what side they are on. But maybe I'm a dreamer. 

Topic's author
#26
EtrnlVw
EtrnlVw's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 2,869
3
3
5
EtrnlVw's avatar
EtrnlVw
3
3
5
-->
@Greyparrot
You can back up with facts on the claim a person is deluded if that person first laid out a string of false information that they claim is true.

If that's the case it's unnecessary to even say it, even if it were true. I'm not talking about rational justification obviously, I'm talking about the epidemic in forums where everyone feels like the other person is deluded and delusional, it's just out of control and has no real validity anymore in debates. And even if it's obvious it still doesn't need to be used as an accusation. It's rude. 

That goes to argumentation though, and this is a debate site where we all just pretend everyone has verifiable information at all times and all venues.

/sarcasm

Everyone believes the other person is deluded, it's irrelevant anymore. 
#27
Mopac
Mopac's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 8,050
3
4
7
Mopac's avatar
Mopac
3
4
7
-->
@EtrnlVw
I never called you delusional or insinuated that you are.

I also think you are overreacting to what I said, because I never implied that anyone was going to hell.

You are talking to someone who has been accused of being a universalist plenty of times in his life, fyi.




#28
Goldtop
Goldtop's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,706
2
2
2
Goldtop's avatar
Goldtop
2
2
2
-->
@EtrnlVw
If someone is complaining about having their posts labeled as deluded "all the time", shouldn't they then take that seriously and attempt to change their posts to non-delusional? Clearly, delusional posts are not in any way intellectual let alone even adult. If someone is just making up stuff that has no basis in reality and can't be shown beyond their imagination, then there's nothing productive they can offer nor have they themselves the intellectual integrity they so desire from others, which only serves to insult everyone else intelligence.

Of course, if the person actually believes their posts to not be delusional when they obviously are, then that person doesn't even have the capacity to distinguish between what is real and what is not. This then goes well beyond just delusion and they need to seek professional help. Unfortunately, if they believe they aren't delusional, they probably won't seek any help and just go on complaining about why no one takes them seriously.


#29
thett3
thett3's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 2,064
3
2
7
thett3's avatar
thett3
3
2
7
there's nothing wrong with calling someone deluded in an argument. it's a little rude but it absolutely is something that should be allowed
#30
Buddamoose
Buddamoose's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 3,178
2
3
6
Buddamoose's avatar
Buddamoose
2
3
6
-->
@EtrnlVw
@Castin
@bsh1
(speech as a personal attack is garbage. That whole personal attack section is tortured AF and a hot mess. You literally used fighting words, when that has rarely been applied and only to accusations of severe crimes. 

Not to mention the example provided, "you're all stupid" applies to the "you are dishonest." If dishonest actions are evidence of a dishonest person. Stupid actions are evidence of a stupid person. 

That whole section is leftbook garbage, period. 

It strikes me as very contextual and interpretive, moderation-wise.

This being why, because that whole section is a mess of subjectivity trying and failing to masquerade as objectivity. Harassing someone repeatedly is one thing. Dropping a "you're stupid" and leaving it at that? Far from what should be deemed punishable wrongdoing. 

 It should be a universal rule in forums that anyone who stoops to the level of calling others deluded has forfeited their position and is not worthy of intellectual interaction in that exchange. 

Nobody is preventing you from acting upon that standard yourself. The issue is that you want to dictate how everyone else takes it, and have it be a universal operative that everyone abides by. And what qualifications as a paragon of virtue and moral acting would you have to dictate that? 

 I think we should make this place easy for newcomers to feel like they can join and speak their minds freely and politely no matter what side they are on. But maybe I'm a dreamer

Do mean words directly prevent a person from otherwise speaking their mind? If you say X, and nobody is stopping you from saying it, How is mean words in response to that changing that a person is still able to speak freely? 

Speaking freely does not mean the ability to speak without response, even if that response is in the form of mean words. Speaking freely means you can speak, and nobody is going to stop you from doing so.