Question about certain types of threads

[normalguy]

It has been my own observation. Not necessarily on this forum may i add. That any time someone posts a thread about anything supernatural or spiritual or about the possibility of UFOS they get such a aggressive and negative response.Meaning some people that reply to them seem to make the original OP feel like a dummy for posting it.

I have even seen when someone just mentions anything about a topic of this nature it seems to turn into major flame and controversy.Like i say in most cases on this forum it's respectful.But even here at times people do get a more than normal reaction in some cases when this subject matter comes up.

Why is this? Thanks... and please be as open and opinionated as possible it will help me understand the reason for this.

 

[annsue]

Whatever the subject matter, there will always be a certain type who like to shoot people down in flames because it gives them a kick or something. Fortunately, I don't think we get many of that type round here.

I think what we tend to get a lot of on MAP is the same daft threads about the same old subjects cropping up with monotonous regularity, and so people tend to react rather negatively. So some poor little new kid who genuinely believes in Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy and the Mystical Properties of Unicorn Chi (or whatever) gets a flaming that he or she didn't see coming at all.

 

[ZeldaHuntertttTibetttt]

On one hand, it's ridiculous to assume we have everything figured out enough to get condescending about what is or isn't, but on the other, there comes a point where you just have to affirm things.

There's a difference between someone genuinely looking for what's real and someone who believes that we, and by association he, are the supreme wisdom in the universe.
Sometimes people feel better living life feeling like they know what's really up from our limited perspective here on earth.

 

[IRunWithScissors]

Ideally, the hilarity of the response should be proportional to the stupidity of the question. This is called Cosmic's First Law. (Provided all remains within the ToS, of course *mod hat back off again*) I.e. if someone asks a question about the supernatural and it's an intelligent question and it's clear they've done some thinking about it then the responses should be respectful and intelligent. At the other end of the spectrum, if someone is asking about chi powers, homoeopathy, aliens, etc. in a way that makes it clear they've done no thinking about it at all and are living in a fantasy world where one day they will be using chi blasts to knock over dudes in black suits then it's perfectly acceptable to set flamethrowers to "crispy" and bring some marshmallows.

However, not everything goes as it should, what with humans being unpredictable. Sometimes people see a thread on the supernatural and the itchy trigger finger does a little twitch. Before they can stop themselves the poor poster and anyone else near them is running around on MAP soaked in petrol and desperately trying to put themselves out.

 

[bahbdorje]

I actually think it's part and parcel of the rise of the skepticism "movement" as whole.
Both on the internet and the wider world.
To borrow a phrase from Sam Harris there is developing a "conversational intolerance" to fantastical claims with no evidence (or backed up by some logical fallacy or other).
Skepticism is very healthy and prevalent in martial arts because of how replete with BS it has been in the past (and still is).
As such I think MAP has acquired a fairly straightforward and skeptical approach to almost everything and sometimes that can come across as perhaps being derisory or harsh.
It also happens that some prominent (and some might say vocal) posters here are of a fairly hardline atheistic/skeptical bent.

Oh and the other reason that supernatural/spirituality is met with a negative response is that it's all mostly hot-air and primitive hocum that is laughable.

 

[mendozalowks]

I think another part of the problem is if you believe something generally considered controversial you're used to getting flak so tend to be a lot more protective or your on the other side of the fence and have nothing but contempt. Both will lead to nothing more productive than flaming.

Also emotion becomes a massive factor in these things especially with things such as religion there's no middle ground so there's no real compromise and no chance of convincing the other side. People get annoyed and it all descends from there.

Sort of an aside but its something I'm really impressed with in the thread about renaming marriage is how its remained civil and argued logically for a few pages now so it is possible.

 

[takethehighway]

I think a lot of the time flame wars start not because of the question itself but more likely the disregard for any other opinion that often comes with it. Usually something like this:Unicorns are the greatest!

Do you have any proof that unicorns exist though coma?

Do you have any proof they don't exist?

I don't need to disprove them, the onus is on you to prove them.

Well here's someone else's opinion that they do exist and they have some sort of authority which makes it proof.

That's not proof, do you have any scientific studies on unicorns?

The scientific community can't be believed because they're on the equine societies payroll.

Do you have proof of this?

Yes, here's 12 youtube videos of people confirming it...
Sound familiar? Whenever someone makes unusual claims they get called on it and when there's no proof they fall back on the same old stuff that convinced them of it in the first. Neither party wants to back down and both think they're right so a stalemate is reached. A flame war becomes inevitable.

The issue isn't with the subject raised, it's got more to do with the general psychology trend you see with people attracted to this type of theory.

 

[cru]

The mean old lady down the street may babble nonsense at you, but doesn't like it when you troll through her garden.

Like the others said, there is overreaction here, but there is as well a limit to the content critiqued.

 

[SororityGirl]

I'll be totally honest with you- it's because fools aren't suffered gladly here. There are no UFOs, john kennedy was shot by that guy in the texas book repository, crystals do not have healing powers, stonehenge is just a neolithic artefact etc. etc. And the delusionals who think otherwise get up people's noses because of the arrogant way that they behave, dahlsim-on being a case in point.

 

[ChristineF]

 

[GEMSUSPENDEDAGAINt]

And I thought we only discuss martial arts and street fights in this forum. Well, ya, one never knows when we might have to fight aliens who land here in UFOs.

 

[roxygirlchantelle]

Wonder what Klingons call their MA?

 

[daniella992000]

Does anyone else think some of maps most interesting discussions are usually those in the OT section?

 

[Kory]

Mok'bara.






I'll get my coat.

 

[Riot]

WOW! That's the first 9 Posts of the thread I was just about to start! That's incontrovertible proof that you know the future. Maybe future aliens told you, but I suspect that my highly developed chi may it easier for your psychic powers to predict.


Sorry, what were we saying about being skeptical??

 

[jennytkd13]

The X files greatest series ever....

 

[keezymama]

Right, here's the problem with this, and why such discussions never end well: what people fall back on is what they consider to be proof. It's proof to them because that is what convinced them in the first place. Obviously it's not particularly rigorous, but there's nothing anyone can do about that.

The other problem is most people don't seem to differentiate between ideas and empirically observable phenomena. So, for example, UFOs:

UFOs exist. There is incontrovertible proof. People see them all the time. That is proof to an extent. Just because they turn out to be planes, balloons, or your insane genius friend's new jetpack and bacofoil flight suit doesn't stop it from being a UFO to the person who saw it. So while the object is unidentified and flying, it's a UFO.

As for aliens, you may not be able to prove or disprove aliens, but that doesn't make the idea any less valid. The issue becomes when people conflate the idea with the reality. At the moment we have zero proof of aliens. We can have a theoretical/philosophical discussion on the subject, but no one can truly say whether or not they exist because there's no proof either way.

So ultimately is does come back to the burden of proof. So people, remember this: If you want to say something which is going to cause a stir either back it up as rigorously as possible with evidence, or clarify what you're getting at.

Posting something about 'chi balls' is likely to get people like myself replying with the same phrase, but leaving out the 'chi' bit.

 

[anime_music_luver]

Plus there's the issue of what is proven and what you interpret it to prove. In your example if someone claims they have seen a UFO at best what they have evidence for is that they have seen an object they interpret to be a UFO, not evidence for UFOs. Sure, this can be extrapolated right out to nihilism but that's a whole other discussion.

By the way when I said my jetpack and thermal insulation suit were TOP SECRET I didn't mean don't tell anyone but it's fine to post it on a public forum.

 

[AdamlTheFrogPrince]

Hey, I mentioned no names! Also, posting a picture of it as your avatar is hardly clever.

the thing is though, what they interpret to be a UFO is a UFO. At least to them. I'm trying really hard not to dive in to post-modernism here (mainly because I hate it), but 'truth' is a pretty relative concept. 'Truth' is usually what the people with the most power define it to be.

 

[BaLLa]

Haha, I should have been more specific and said extraterrestrial aliens instead of UFOs, though I guess claiming a UFO is an alien invalidates it as an unidentified flying object.

You have to admit my Unicorn shaped jetback is pretty awesome though.