• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Politically Correct?

Am I being politically correct in the example given?


  • Total voters
    36
What does is it mean if you see colors right away?

I'm not sure. I guess that would mean that your eyes create a faster "rebound" effect. Although I should have said "start seeing colors during the black and white parts" instead of just "start seeing colors".
 
Last edited:
There's a difference between feeling forced to conform and feeling forced to do something. I wouldn't say that I've never felt as though I've been forced to do something. Just that I've never felt forced to conform.

Ewww,, you're tricky. To conform is literally to "behave according to socially acceptable conventions or standards." The key word behave means "act or conduct oneself in a specified way".
So "to do" something is an act of "behaving" ergo to conform. Therefore "forced to do something" is the same as "forced to conform" disqualifying the above statement. Why do I feel like this is law school 101?

I actually don't feel forced by law to conform on certain things because of the reasoning I outlined earlier. More than a few times I've broken laws because I chose to break them. When I do this, though, I willingly accept any potential consequences from my violation of law. That's willingness to accept the consequences is what prevents the feeling of being forced.

You accept the consequences not out of agreement or you wouldn't have done the act, you accept them because society is forcing them on you. Though I drive real slow in certain areas because I choose to it's not out of agreement but because I feel forced to conform or face the consequences. The consequences being an act of force upon our decision making process.
 
What does is it mean if you see colors right away?

I don't know about you but I think my reason is from dropping too much acid. That picture totally freaks me out :lol:
 
Ewww,, you're tricky. To conform is literally to "behave according to socially acceptable conventions or standards." The key word behave means "act or conduct oneself in a specified way".
So "to do" something is an act of "behaving" ergo to conform. Therefore "forced to do something" is the same as "forced to conform" disqualifying the above statement. Why do I feel like this is law school 101?

The problem is that you are implying that "conducting one's self in a specified way" is the same as "behaving according to socially acceptable conventions".

"Something" is not always a socially acceptable convention. for example, if I force someone to eat a pile of **** by beating them until they eat it, they are not being forced to conform, they are simply beign forced to eat ****.


You accept the consequences not out of agreement or you wouldn't have done the act, you accept them because society is forcing them on you.

Not at all. Society has determined that there will be certain specific consequences for certain actions, but it does not force them upon me. I agree to accept them by way of engaging in those actions.

Though I drive real slow in certain areas because I choose to it's not out of agreement but because I feel forced realize that my choices are to conform or face the consequences and I would rather not face the consequences.

I altered your quote so that it would be more accurate. You understand the fact that society has created those consequences, so you base your decisions on that knowledge.

The consequences being an act of force upon our decision making process.

The consequences aren't an act of force upon your decision making process, they are a factor in it. If they were an act of force, you wouldn't have the option to not conform.
 
The problem is that you are implying that "conducting one's self in a specified way" is the same as "behaving according to socially acceptable conventions".

"Something" is not always a socially acceptable convention. for example, if I force someone to eat a pile of **** by beating them until they eat it, they are not being forced to conform, they are simply beign forced to eat ****.

Not at all. Society has determined that there will be certain specific consequences for certain actions, but it does not force them upon me. I agree to accept them by way of engaging in those actions.

I altered your quote so that it would be more accurate. You understand the fact that society has created those consequences, so you base your decisions on that knowledge.

The consequences aren't an act of force upon your decision making process, they are a factor in it. If they were an act of force, you wouldn't have the option to not conform.

We keep batting the "feel forced" which equates to social pressure to "being physically forced" or "forced consequences" by a greater force, which is not really the measure.

Before this digresses into po-tate-toe vs po-ta-tow goony babble let's ask the question as a Poll. And you can't voice your opinion on it's meaning and all that claptrap and no influencing anyones decision with your seniority or popularity. That would be considered social pressure. And we can't refer back to this thread. Let the posters argue the question first then after a winner is decided we can chime in.

"How many of you really hate Political Correctness but feel forced to conform or be an outcast"? This is the original question slightly modified.

If the Yes's hit 20 first then I win and you two nudniks, tpd and TC have to lick the chili off my toilet rim and be my manslaves for two months.
Seriously, you have to say on that thread "grip took us to school because we are a fool". And if vice versa on the No's then I'll say you won,, agreeable? If the poll never hits 20 yea's or nays then 10 was the limit. Just so a majority is reached within a 7 day time limit.

Since you not only disagree with the question you even disagree with the context of it. I mean if you're really that confident then those terms should be acceptable? You'll probably win not because I think what've I said is that far out of bounds in accepted public speech, but because the members here have a strange habit of dissecting someones summary opinions into unconnected statements to reply and argue. I think if a whole opinion is given then it should be countered by a similar method. Not chopped up and pulled out of context.
 
We keep batting the "feel forced" which equates to social pressure to "being physically forced" or "forced consequences" by a greater force, which is not really the measure.

Before this digresses into po-tate-toe vs po-ta-tow goony babble let's ask the question as a Poll. And you can't voice your opinion on it's meaning and all that claptrap and no influencing anyones decision with your seniority or popularity. That would be considered social pressure. And we can't refer back to this thread. Let the posters argue the question first then after a winner is decided we can chime in.

"How many of you really hate Political Correctness but feel forced to conform or be an outcast"? This is the original question slightly modified.

If the Yes's hit 20 first then I win and you two nudniks, tpd and TC have to lick the chili off my toilet rim and be my manslaves for two months.
Seriously, you have to say on that thread "grip took us to school because we are a fool". And if vice versa on the No's then I'll say you won,, agreeable? If the poll never hits 20 yea's or nays then 10 was the limit. Just so a majority is reached within a 7 day time limit.

Since you not only disagree with the question you even disagree with the context of it. I mean if you're really that confident then those terms should be acceptable? You'll probably win not because I think what've I said is that far out of bounds in accepted public speech, but because the members here have a strange habit of dissecting someones summary opinions into unconnected statements to reply and argue. I think if a whole opinion is given then it should be countered by a similar method. Not chopped up and pulled out of context.

Why would I worry about the results of such a poll? My position has nothing to do with what other people may or may not feel. My position is all about the accuracy of those feelings. They certainly might feel forced, but that doesn't mean they are forced. My point is that, regardless of their feelings on the matter, they are not actually forced to conform in any way.

If 20,000 people voted yes in such a poll before three people voted no, my position would still remain the same. I don't base my positions on appeal to majority fallacies anyway. Just because many people agree with something doesn't mean it is correct. Case in point: at one time in history, the vast majority of people believed the sun orbited the Earth.
 
They certainly might feel forced, but that doesn't mean they are forced. My point is that, regardless of their feelings on the matter, they are not actually forced to conform in any way.

They may not be forced to conform but they may feel that way, which is all my question ask.

Case in point: at one time in history, the vast majority of people believed the sun orbited the Earth.

Go far enough back and humans probably ate their poop like Fido. No doubt humans are continuing to evolve and understand the nature of their existence.

In a sense the sun actually does orbit the earth because the whole solar system is traveling through curved space like a bolo (bola), where though the earth is in the suns orbit the sun does wobble thru an extended arc around the earth. Placing each in the others gravitational grasp with each ultimately spinning around the other. That statement is a stretch but it's what I felt like was done to mine,, lol.

Why would I worry about the results of such a poll? My position has nothing to do with what other people may or may not feel. My position is all about the accuracy of those feelings. If 20,000 people voted yes in such a poll before three people voted no, my position would still remain the same. I don't base my positions on appeal to majority fallacies anyway. Just because many people agree with something doesn't mean it is correct.

I felt the Poll was a win, win for me because if I won I could crow on endlessly and if I lost I could claim you needed popular approval to support your position. Kind of like a PC moment. Dammit man you disemboweled my idea. :mrgreen:
 
They may not be forced to conform but they may feel that way, which is all my question ask.

To be fair, I answered your question from the perspective of how and why I have never felt forced to conform. My reasoning was just generalizable.



Go far enough back and humans probably ate their poop like Fido.

If by "far enough" you mean "to Tucker's breakfast", then yes, this is true. I skipped lunch.

In a sense the sun actually does orbit the earth because the whole solar system is traveling through curved space like a bolo (bola), where though the earth is in the suns orbit the sun does wobble thru an extended arc around the earth. Placing each in the others gravitational grasp with each ultimately spinning around the other. That statement is a stretch but it's what I felt like was done to mine,, lol.

While the Earth's gravity does act upon the Sun, it doesn't really orbit the Earth because the barycenter (which is one of the foci of the Earth's elliptical orbit) is extremely close to the Sun's center mass. This makes the wobble caused by the Earth's gravity almost totally imperceptible (this is why the discovery of Earth-like exoplanets so difficult). Compare that to Pluto and Charon, which have distinct orbits around each other due to the fact that the barycenter lies far from the center masses of both planetoids.


But I like the way you're thinking!



I felt the Poll was a win, win for me because if I won I could crow on endlessly and if I lost I could claim you needed popular approval to support your position. Kind of like a PC moment. Dammit man you disemboweled my idea. :mrgreen:

:lol:
 
While the Earth's gravity does act upon the Sun, it doesn't really orbit the Earth because the barycenter (which is one of the foci of the Earth's elliptical orbit) is extremely close to the Sun's center mass. This makes the wobble caused by the Earth's gravity almost totally imperceptible (this is why the discovery of Earth-like exoplanets so difficult). Compare that to Pluto and Charon, which have distinct orbits around each other due to the fact that the barycenter lies far from the center masses of both planetoids.

But I like the way you're thinking!

I never knew that, my idea was purely imaginative. I pictured the solar system traveling through curved space with the earth orbiting a spinning sun and causing an arc due to inherent wobble from outside and inside gravitational effects, like the centrifugal force of a hammer thrower spinning around and moving in a circle eventually due to the pulling of the hammer. I forgot to consider the masses of the sun and earth displacing the space around them making our planets movement around it more like a hair circling a drain indefinitely. This stuff gives me a brain cramp :confused:
 
I highly doubt that. ;)

Ok try this one.

Is the universe made from finite potential energy or is its source infinite or zero? Because as the universe expands, this zero splits into positive energy of matter from the force of expansion/separation and negative gravitational potential energy. No energy is lost in the universe it is only transformed. E=MC2 shows the interchangeable nature of energy and mass. If the universe is expanding exponentially it potentially has an unlimited mass or energy field. The higgs boson gives mass to every elementary particle that couples to the Higgs field. If the unified field theory shows that their was an equal amount of matter/anti-matter after the big bang the reason that they didn't cancel each other out was the elimination of anti-matter by the big bada bing/bada boom...lol
 
Back
Top Bottom