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.
#14877848
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.


I give this a hard cosign, but also add that this post-modernist lunacy smacks of Russian thinking much more than it does of American, regardless of party or intelligence. When someone claiming to be a conservative spouts the whole "perception is reality" line, I begin to strongly suspect I'm dealing with a Russian bot.

Still, there are enough people spouting products of post-modernism that don't seem to realize they're doing it--people who explicitly defy reason and engage if deep skepticism about the left and the government--that I can't deny that we are the last group of people I'd imagine being in the grip of such a silly attitude.
#14912703
It is always fun to watch people display their ignorance of what a ‘modern conservative’ is, at least in the US.
It is not emotion, it is the belief the local community has the right to decide how they live. That’s it. Everything else attributed to conservatives by liberals is a smokescreen to hide our real difference. Centralized government versus decentralized. Since both parties support centralized government (despite what they say), the conservative message gets lost.
#14912715
As a true (Hanoverian) Conservative, I hate those fucking Liberals with their Boston Tea parties, their 1832 Reform acts and their Child Labour laws. Things were good in the old days before the Victorians messed it all up.

I realised there's a boo-boo in the above post but I'll let it stand.
#14912719
Ah, since conservatives are defined, outdatedly, as protectors of the status quo, then they can be portrayed as luddites by believing all progress is in the right direction. For the status quo to be wrong, you must prove the progressivism is for a higher good. Conservatives would be better defined as protectors against jumping too quickly on a new path out of ignorance.
#14912736
Godstud wrote: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.

This seems like a good point to start. I agree there is a lack of true conservative voices here on Pofo. That's not surprising as it's mirrored in the current political dialogue.

This country was formed by the joint resolution of both progressives and conservatives. They acted in reasonable cooperation. They continued to function in that fashion right up until the civil war. The issue of slavery (and it's expansion) changed things from a cooperative effort into a competitive one. Which being regionally based, led to war.

Post Civil War, Progressives had an open hand, without conservatives to slow the process and restrain more radical developments, the nation suffered. Industrialization brought new economic factors to bear and rampant capitalism bred a new conservative faction. Again cooperative effort ensued and this lasted until after WWI.

WWI wrought many changes in the world and resulted in a massive spread of new ideologies. Socialism and Communism reached the industrial workers in America and took root. Cooperation between Conservatives and Progressives again turned into competition and violence was again resorted too. It was class based rather than regional.

WWII put things on hold and reunited conservative and progressive in an uncertain, goal oriented, truce. But it did not end the competition which resumed almost immediately after the war and now had a political basis that divided the nation. Mutual respect on both sides began to degenerate.

It has continued to degenerate into partisan politics ever since. There is now no cooperation at all between conservative and progressive. The competition rages "Unreasonably" at this point and "Winning" takes precedent over the good of the country. This is fertile ground for the loonies (as we see regularly here on Pofo.)

Where do we go from here? How do we restore cooperative trust and bipartisanship? Reason and dialogue rather than rant and rave?

Zam 8)
#14914296
Last 3 decades they have been reasoning on more and more hatred, To the end that they literally elected a man of hate of the highest level as their leader. The evangelicals and the right own him, he is their type of christian and their type of human being. This may be the low point in our national history. Evil and hate has won the day for now. \
It will change soon, with demographics the right had at the most had three decades , now I see them having no more then one and thispresidency will be the last one with the title of Republican. This hater group will ultimately be rejected, that and demographics will be their end. There will be a conservative party , there has to be, they are a major voice in this country and in the future conservatives may be respected again. It won't operate on hate, because if it does, it will go also.
They won't be able to use the Republican banner , it will be to poisoned by then, So they will need a new name, How about the Christian flag waver party or The gun and cannon patriot party, what's your choice.
#14914302
addem wrote: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.
I just have to ask if you vote for conservative values , you don't seem to and I find humor in your talk correlating Science and conservatism, To me they reject science totally. I mean is cutting your taxes that big of a deal that it can be a reason to across the board support this countries conservative party, if you want it all, be part of the rich , they literally have received it all for over 40 years. They have gained it all By tax law proposed and executed totally by conservitives.
#14914307
jbander wrote:This may be the low point in our national history. Evil and hate has won the day for now. \ It will change soon.

Lets hope so. It seems from time to time complacent voters need to be reminded of the alternative to moderately progressive government. It was time to reevaluate globalization, immigration, china policy. Hopefully the liberal side of things has been paying attention.

Zam

No, I am just a near genius. :lol: That doesn't[…]

Antifa is a fringe group on the "left",[…]

I support this move Ter, or at least a study into […]

Trump and Russiagate

No one who has been on the receiving end of a fede[…]