The Problem of Evil combined with the problem of Free Will

[Valyza1]

Oh, dear Zeus in the Clouds, I've been shamed out of DOING plenty of things! Shaming is an extremely effective finite term preventative tool, don't get me wrong.  Being shamed never changed or even effected what I believe.  

Sure it did.  Once upon a time you believed that it was acceptable to do or say x.  After having said or done x in view of people, they changed your mind about that, with shame.  You might even be in the position where you don't understand their response, and think it was unfair..but regardless of that, they definitely changed your belief about -something-.

I think you're confounding beliefs and habits. Knowing how to behave in social environments and society is a habit that needs to be trained into you. Negative reinforcement is often an effective tool for doing so. Actually believing something to be true is something that an individual decides on his or her own, whether gradually or instantly. It can be influenced by others giving evidence in it's favor, or it could just be something that "works" for a person psychologically, but it's an internal assent upon which fear and self-censorship have no power to influence.

I;d settle for that, personally. In my opinion, what people believe, so long as it's privately held, is no one else's business or problem. As long as bigots understand that their religion doesn't give them a pass for being bigots..I don't care that they believe bigoted shit. Feel me? It;s as if you think that ridicule is being applied to stop people from believing, rather than to oppose people who do or saying terrible shit -because- they believe?

Some people think ridicule helps the one being ridiculed by weakening the "ridiculous" belief. Some former believers even testify that it has. That's what I'm addressing.

I see what you're saying.  Congress is, after all, supposed to be a sound board for the People and reflect the interests of the populace.  So if you can shame enough loud mouth theocrats to silence, you can help turn the tide against any theocracy in our government.  I've only 2 things to note: 1)Fear of expression creates a duel consciousness, so the more true views are repressed in the seats of government, the more fuel is added to the fire of fringe groups representing those same views which, in turn, form revolutionary movements.  The public face of a movement, politician, or population is only effective for so long before it shows it's true colors.  2)Any point underlying a ridicule can be made clearer and more effectively by being made plain and uninflected instead, reaching an agreement and/or consideration by a much larger group of onlookers.

Personally, I prefer that the loudmouth theocrats keep talking, so that shame can be piled upon them in plain view of the less-loudmouthed but equally theocratic dipshits.   I appreciate that you think some sort of refined rational debate or conversation would work better.. but that hasn't been my experience, particularly with those whose rational and civil agency has been so effectively subverted by their religious beliefs that they go around mouthing off horrible shit for anyone and everyone to hear.

My experience has been otherwise, primarily when disavowing the idea that my position is the "correct position", and relying purely on question and answer and more questions to understand the other point of view. I'm not always able to come to some agreement, but I always come away learning something about my own pov, if not their's. It doesn't appear to be so much a lack of rationality, but defensiveness that closes people's minds to other points of view. And defensiveness is practically the instant natural reaction to ridicule.

These boards are a testament to the ineffectiveness of that approach, specifically with regards to some people™ and some beliefs™. There's been -plenty- of rational, civil discussion regarding them..from all corners. Those people nevertheless persist in their beliefs. No agreement has been reached. No additional consideration is made. Some of them believe in giants, actual giants.......ffs.

Go talk them out of that, all civil and rational-like, if you think that's how their beliefs work. Imma make jokes.

1)I'm not so much discussing the usefulness of rational conversation in these forums as I am discussing the uselessness of ridicule. In fact, my original post rather lamented the uselessness of both, until someone pointed out the usefulness of rational conversation, which is a weaker point for me to debate so I conceded.
2)I'm not trying to change anyone's beliefs. My whole point is to highlight the lack of progressiveness of the "I'm right, you're wrong" interchange.