Do conservatives argue from emotion? - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Traditional 'common sense' values and duty to the state.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#14868421
In speaking with conservatives on various issues, I fail to find any logical arguments to support their views.

On the issue of homosexuality, they merely express repugnance at the idea, and this forms the basis of the view that gay marriage should be illegal. I have never heard a logical argument for why gay marriage is wrong, rather it all stems from emotion.

On the issue of Islam, they express anger and disapproval towards the teachings of the Quran, and again, they form their anti-Islamic views merely on this emotional basis. Yet there is no logical argument for how or why the teachings of Islam are factually wrong.

On the issue of abortion, they again merely express an extreme dislike at the idea of infants getting murdered. Yet again, they are completely unable to offer a logical argument to prove that infanticide is actually wrong...again they rely purely on their feelings to say that abortion is morally wrong.

Now obviously the most bizarre facet of the illogic of conservatives, is that they seem to project this lack of logic onto their political opponents. You've heard them claim that liberals are illogical who can't think rationally. When a conservative make this claim, what he is actually doing is spewing forth psychological projection, which is a sign of weakness, insecurity, and dishonesty. Because as I've just shown above, they in fact have no rational arguments to support their own views.

Are conservatives incapable of rational argumentation?
#14868444
Yes, some conservatives actually have arguments from reason on logic, but on this forum, there are extremely few that choose to do so.

It's a choice to reject science, logic, and reason. When you rely on your "feelings", you tend to push those things aside.
#14868468
Very few conservatives actually use their brain. The ones that do are usually the ones who are the most vocal about what is wrong and right. They are the ones who are actually paying attention to what the people are whining about, rather than the ones who are only thinking of their pockets or their junk.
#14868629
I'm curious what you take to be rational as opposed to merely emotional. For instance, why outlaw murder? A sensible response is that it's horrible. You could try to avoid such language by saying, murder disrupts society. But then, why is that bad? Again, I think you have to appeal to a fundamental set of values which, under your characterization, would sound fairly emotional.

I am a conservative in the sense that I believe in conservative American values--I'm not sure if that's the same brand of conservatism you have in mind. But for me that conservatism is extremely rational. It promotes Western, scientific values. I do not oppose abortion, because it makes little sense to call a clump of cells a "person". I don't care about gay marriage. What I do care about is lowering my taxes, rooting out corruption, and regulating a society so that it is free and fair.

As a note, a lot of conservatives today think "regulation" is a bad word, but that's just childish. Regulation includes regulating fraud, violence, pollution of property that's not yours, and a lot of other instances that conservatives--if they have any sense in their damn heads--would find uncontroversial and necessary for a good life.
#14868857
There used to be a lot of conservatives on the board who made citations, wrote logically, and made good arguments.

So conservatives are capable of this.

The current crop, at least the loudest section of the current crop, have difficulty with this.

I'm on record pointing this out. What I suspect is that they are suffering from the same postmodern lunacy that used to infect certain sections of the left twenty years ago before being purged.

A brief bit: Postmodernism is successful in some ways. If you are going to study the Raj, it makes sense to not just look at British records, but how people lived under the Raj and how policies made them feel and whatnot. These unofficial records are part of the Postmodern mission statement.

To rely wholly on these unofficial records is too. The idea being that the British clerks making the documents had their own world view that do not correspond to any particular reality beyond their own world view. So the clerk making the document might have a totally different view of things than the commander that ordered them made, rendering them only useful as a guide for the clerk, but in no way a reflection of reality. In the same way, any witness statement is not conducive for reality, and on and on.

You end up with discussions like in the tipping thread where a conservative goes ahead and admits he doesn't know anything about the bill, refuses to learn anything about the bill, but believes that his feelings about the bill corresponds to reality better than anybody's flawed facts about it.

This is a view that has been encouraged by the worst parts of the right, to not trust their lying eyes; that any source of information is tainted, and that one has to rely only on how you feel about an issue.

Again, there were portions of the left in the 80s and 90s tainted with this until the house of cards fell apart. Part of this had to do with the transition into Third Wave Feminism and a certain reactionary strain of the New Democrats and whatnot...But basically, it cannot be sustained to continue to deny that objective facts exist.

So, not all, but a lot of the conservative movement as it stands right now is based entirelly from emotion and an open rejection of factual information.
#14869006
Well said, The Immortal Goon. I think I shall decline from beheading you, if I ever meet you, based on this last post of yours. The Quickening can wait.

This part, in particular is distressing:
TIG wrote: to not trust their lying eyes; that any source of information is tainted, and that one has to rely only on how you feel about an issue.
I see this far too much on this forum. It's like a disease of ignorance and stupidity.
The Deep Thinks of Hong Wu

You are doing this too. Ie: climate change & […]

Didn't like the Antarctic analogy, here's the thi[…]

@skinster @starman2003 I am not taking the […]

It turns out that Roy Moore, despite being cut sho[…]