OrionTheWolf
Posts: 7329
Joined: 10/11/2006 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: ygraine Good morning or good afternoon. I am reading some posts "shun", "group ostracizing", "blacklisting", etc, and I am, frankly, horrified at the thought of what some of the ramifications of these actions entail. Before you think I am after a "kinder, gentler Gor", let me assure you I am not. However, shunning, blacklisting, and things of that ilk have been tried unsuccessfully in our Western Society (on a large scale, think McCarthyism and the blacklists of the 50's). Amish shun their members when they don't toe the line exactly, and the shunning is often subjective. You sure do read alot more into something, than what is there. Is there a reason you are looking at the extreme position? Also, socially ostracizing unacceptable behavior is very effective for animals that are not solitary in nature. What premise do you use to say that it is unsuccessful? quote:
When we shun people, we close our minds to other ideas and we no longer allow that person to grow by learning from us. I have seen among my friends deep and significant changes in their journey through this ethos. Had I "shunned" them, my life would be much less rich. The very prejudice we face as Goreans is often a shunning of sorts. Shunning does not automatically equate to closing your mind. It means that you do not voluntarily interact with that person. This can come in many forms, and is proven to be very effective in wolf packs and dolphin pods. Do you consider the Gorean Way of life to be inclusive of all people, or exclusive to those that believe a certain way? quote:
I am fine with thinking to myself, "hey I don't really want to deal with that persons opinions today", or dismissing a person myself after they have shown repeatedly they are not going to teach me anything new or just are interested in drama, but to have some group "shun"? I don't think so. I think it is the very thing we as Goreans have to wrestle with all the time. So what do you think of laws in society that locks a person away? Are they automatically bad because you did not do it, or maybe you do not agree with it? quote:
Ostracizing someone like a pack of hormone-loaded teenaged girls is not the answer. I think individuals have the right, and the ability, to ignore someone, to delete or block or no longer participate with someone. Those tools are here for us to use. The fact is, we seldom truly use them. If enough individuals really did what they said they were going to do (ignore a person), in time, that person would go away. The opposite of love is not hate or any sort of emotional attention, the opposite is indifference. That is, to me, the best weapon of choice, mano a mano, not groupthink. I wish you well Y You seem to be saying it is okay for the effect of ostracizing occurs, as long as we do not talk about it, and reach that conclusion on our own, is this correct? So then are we all so slavish to sheep mentality, that things cannot be discussed and then each person make their own decision? How do you create a community if people have opposing standards? How do you show a consequence to bad behavior, as determined by the society? Why ever say anything to how anyone acts, as it may create shunning of that person? You call this "Shun the nonbelievers" based upon a comment I made ina different thread. This title goes way beyond anything that was even implied in that comment. Again I ask, why are you making more of this, than what was there? If you did not understand my comments, then why jump to a sensational and extreme conclusion, when a few questions would have put it in the proper context. Instead you have created a non-existant contention, which is very similar to what is seen in politics. Orion
_____________________________
Die die glauben fordern keinen Beweis. Denen die zweifeln genuegt kein Beweis.
|