Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2016 7:50:20 GMT -5
Critics ironically criticize everyone else based on their views and beliefs that others views and beliefs don't "fit in" with what they and others holding the same views or beliefs view and believe.
And the ironic and hypocritical part of all of this is they never critisize their own views and beliefs, what they've been taught or told, what they can absolutely prove without a doubt to be true or untrue etc...
We use assimilaion and accomodation to develop new views and beliefs.
To assimilate is basically to take in and incorporate a view or belief as one's own views or beliefs that they already have/hold.
It's not assimilating or accommodating themselves that the critic necessarily has a problem with.
But rather the views and beliefs they are basing all of their version of "reality" on.
Their Schemas that they assimilate and accommodate new views and beliefs could be just as inaccurate as what they are criticizing.
If a critic goes through life believing they only have 1 arm, and a man tell him he's wrong...
The critic will critisize until be is blue in the face that he only has 1 arm...
But if the other man strikes the critics arm, will that critic feel it?
Perhaps we won't!
Perhaps his beliefs alone would shape his entire reality and in believing he has only 1 arm, might completely "block" any mental awareness of pain in his other...but does blood not still flow through this arm? Does it not still have bones and tissue?
I guess you could say that this critic lives in his "own little world" and anything that anyone or anything tries to say to change that, will be in vain, like the blood in his "nonexistent" arm.
For those who would rather not consciously "let" or "allow" their beliefs to be challenged will defend those beliefs and challenge anyone or anything that goes against them in order to...
A. Distract/keep themselves from challenging their own beliefs
B. Take the attention off of themselves and their (probably inaccurate) views and beliefs and put it on those who are challenging them
C. ETC
You can challenge others views and beliefs all you want but if you do not challenge hour own, how could you be sure that what you have been taught/told is real truth?
If you assimilate and accommodate new information on previous lies, what will happen?
Is your whole schema, construct or view of reality not flawed?
Does it bother you that I "misspelled" some words and have purposefully kept them they way that they are because either way they are still correct?
What is an "h" upside down and reversed? What are your views and beliefs upside down and reversed? Maybe people don't like to be limited by restrictions forced on them since birth and choose to think freely without people like you criticizing them using views and beliefs that are based on schemas that could possibly even more flawed and inaccurate than what's being critiqued...
In other words:
Is it fair to say that with this being a possibility, you should maybe critisize your OWN views and beliefs all the way to the core or roots of your Schema(s) and refrain from trying to keep others from doing the same?
And the ironic and hypocritical part of all of this is they never critisize their own views and beliefs, what they've been taught or told, what they can absolutely prove without a doubt to be true or untrue etc...
We use assimilaion and accomodation to develop new views and beliefs.
To assimilate is basically to take in and incorporate a view or belief as one's own views or beliefs that they already have/hold.
It's not assimilating or accommodating themselves that the critic necessarily has a problem with.
But rather the views and beliefs they are basing all of their version of "reality" on.
Their Schemas that they assimilate and accommodate new views and beliefs could be just as inaccurate as what they are criticizing.
If a critic goes through life believing they only have 1 arm, and a man tell him he's wrong...
The critic will critisize until be is blue in the face that he only has 1 arm...
But if the other man strikes the critics arm, will that critic feel it?
Perhaps we won't!
Perhaps his beliefs alone would shape his entire reality and in believing he has only 1 arm, might completely "block" any mental awareness of pain in his other...but does blood not still flow through this arm? Does it not still have bones and tissue?
I guess you could say that this critic lives in his "own little world" and anything that anyone or anything tries to say to change that, will be in vain, like the blood in his "nonexistent" arm.
For those who would rather not consciously "let" or "allow" their beliefs to be challenged will defend those beliefs and challenge anyone or anything that goes against them in order to...
A. Distract/keep themselves from challenging their own beliefs
B. Take the attention off of themselves and their (probably inaccurate) views and beliefs and put it on those who are challenging them
C. ETC
You can challenge others views and beliefs all you want but if you do not challenge hour own, how could you be sure that what you have been taught/told is real truth?
If you assimilate and accommodate new information on previous lies, what will happen?
Is your whole schema, construct or view of reality not flawed?
Does it bother you that I "misspelled" some words and have purposefully kept them they way that they are because either way they are still correct?
What is an "h" upside down and reversed? What are your views and beliefs upside down and reversed? Maybe people don't like to be limited by restrictions forced on them since birth and choose to think freely without people like you criticizing them using views and beliefs that are based on schemas that could possibly even more flawed and inaccurate than what's being critiqued...
In other words:
Is it fair to say that with this being a possibility, you should maybe critisize your OWN views and beliefs all the way to the core or roots of your Schema(s) and refrain from trying to keep others from doing the same?