I was talking to JackieDaytona74 about people who insist that their fantasy is real. I have no problem with the uncommitted. I am one myself (but I don't bother with fantasies). Psychology is revealed by what people say and the arguments they make. It doesn't require telepathy.
It's assuming that people who directly argue a position believe the position, and are committed. I've presented plenty of arguments I'm not fully convinced on, without making explicitly clear I'm not a full believer in the theory/idea.
Devil's advocate has value, and pushing discussion forward does as well. One need not say this is what they're doing for that to be true.
Yes. It is taking people at their word. Otherwise, they are liars and frauds. But I am talking about people who insist their fantasy is real...not that it is some kind of hypothetical horse for a sophomoric bullshit session.
One need not say anything for all manner of facts to be true. What is the meaning of that point? It is like saying "the sky is blue" or "two plus two equals four."
I don't need to preface every comment I make with a big fat disclaimer stating I'm playing Devil's Advocate, or am simply attempting to open up discussion on theories, to not be a liar or fraud.
And you're making a difference where I see none. You say you're talking about people specifically insisting something is true with no proof. I'm saying that you're conflating people who do this with people who don't, but who both present their posts in a similar way.
Edit: To be clear, I don't even do this regularly if at all, but the people who do are not your punching bag.
Plenty of people are perfectly capable of sitting comfortably at "it might be so" until further evidence is provided.
Maybe don't talk like you know people you know nothing about. Kinda ironic, in fact.
I was talking to JackieDaytona74 about people who insist that their fantasy is real. I have no problem with the uncommitted. I am one myself (but I don't bother with fantasies). Psychology is revealed by what people say and the arguments they make. It doesn't require telepathy.
It's assuming that people who directly argue a position believe the position, and are committed. I've presented plenty of arguments I'm not fully convinced on, without making explicitly clear I'm not a full believer in the theory/idea.
Devil's advocate has value, and pushing discussion forward does as well. One need not say this is what they're doing for that to be true.
Yes. It is taking people at their word. Otherwise, they are liars and frauds. But I am talking about people who insist their fantasy is real...not that it is some kind of hypothetical horse for a sophomoric bullshit session.
One need not say anything for all manner of facts to be true. What is the meaning of that point? It is like saying "the sky is blue" or "two plus two equals four."
I don't need to preface every comment I make with a big fat disclaimer stating I'm playing Devil's Advocate, or am simply attempting to open up discussion on theories, to not be a liar or fraud.
And you're making a difference where I see none. You say you're talking about people specifically insisting something is true with no proof. I'm saying that you're conflating people who do this with people who don't, but who both present their posts in a similar way.
Edit: To be clear, I don't even do this regularly if at all, but the people who do are not your punching bag.