4 ms·

Not sure what the 'no' is in regard to. That's entirely aligned to my comment. Or did you think obstinate devotion to opinions and prejudices only manifests in

Not sure what the 'no' is in regard to. That's entirely aligned to my comment. Or did you think obstinate devotion to opinions and prejudices only manifests in the the group of people you happen to disagree with?

TulliusCicero 6y ago
You focused on unwillingness to change one's opinion. That's certainly a definition, but the more common one in use is about prejudice, especially prejudice based on inherent traits like sex or race or sexuality. I'm sure you're aware of that, which is why it's confusing that you're acting as if you're not. I don't dispute that it's extraordinarily difficult to get people to change political opinions, especially on the fringes. That was never my contention, I made that pretty clear with the example of bigoted communities I chose being white supremacists. Not sure how you could misread that, unless you wanted to.
- missosoup 6y ago
  By choosing white supremacists, you've indicated the exact lack of understanding of what the term bigot means. It's not just a combination of the various *isms and phobias. It's the inability to accept new viewpoints - which is equally prevalent on both sides of the political spectrum. The left is just as unwilling to engage in dialogue or entertain the idea that not all of their views are inherently 'good' as the right. I can't relate at all to white supremacists, but I can tell you that they're more willing to actually discuss and argue their point of view than the 'shout until you get you way' ultra left wing. > Not sure how you could misread that, unless you wanted to Not everyone interprets the same inputs the same way. Especially not in your case when you claim to pick a 'more common' definition but carefully walk around the actual dictionary definition of both Oxford and Webster. Using that as an excuse for a thinly veiled accusation is a pretty good example of bigotry. I disagree with you, therefore you throw a thinly veiled accusation that I'm 'one of those' instead of actually engaging in debate on any level where you're prepared to lose. Why argue on merits when you can accuse the other person of deliberately misreading because of agenda.
  - TulliusCicero 6y ago
    > It's the inability to accept new viewpoints No, it's not just that. I don't understand why you're being intentionally obtuse here, other than that the framing helps your viewpoint if you can trick others into accepting it. Words can have more than one definition. Yours isn't the one I was using, no matter you wish it was otherwise. Again, since you apparently missed this the first time around, or intentionally ignored it: > especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance
    - buzzkillington 6y ago
      "When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less." "The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things." "The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master—that's all."

TulliusCicero 6y ago

You focused on unwillingness to change one's opinion. That's certainly a definition, but the more common one in use is about prejudice, especially prejudice based on inherent traits like sex or race or sexuality. I'm sure you're aware of that, which is why it's confusing that you're acting as if you're not. I don't dispute that it's extraordinarily difficult to get people to change political opinions, especially on the fringes. That was never my contention, I made that pretty clear with the example of bigoted communities I chose being white supremacists. Not sure how you could misread that, unless you wanted to.

missosoup 6y ago
By choosing white supremacists, you've indicated the exact lack of understanding of what the term bigot means. It's not just a combination of the various *isms and phobias. It's the inability to accept new viewpoints - which is equally prevalent on both sides of the political spectrum. The left is just as unwilling to engage in dialogue or entertain the idea that not all of their views are inherently 'good' as the right. I can't relate at all to white supremacists, but I can tell you that they're more willing to actually discuss and argue their point of view than the 'shout until you get you way' ultra left wing. > Not sure how you could misread that, unless you wanted to Not everyone interprets the same inputs the same way. Especially not in your case when you claim to pick a 'more common' definition but carefully walk around the actual dictionary definition of both Oxford and Webster. Using that as an excuse for a thinly veiled accusation is a pretty good example of bigotry. I disagree with you, therefore you throw a thinly veiled accusation that I'm 'one of those' instead of actually engaging in debate on any level where you're prepared to lose. Why argue on merits when you can accuse the other person of deliberately misreading because of agenda.
- TulliusCicero 6y ago
  > It's the inability to accept new viewpoints No, it's not just that. I don't understand why you're being intentionally obtuse here, other than that the framing helps your viewpoint if you can trick others into accepting it. Words can have more than one definition. Yours isn't the one I was using, no matter you wish it was otherwise. Again, since you apparently missed this the first time around, or intentionally ignored it: > especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance
  - buzzkillington 6y ago
    "When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less." "The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things." "The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master—that's all."