Why do wingnuts unquestionably make sweeping generalizations about the opposition?

[xotoxi]

I guess that's what makes them wingnuts.

 

[Truthmatters]

they want the world to be simple.

They cant live in the adult world

 

[WillowTree]

because each and everyone of you think, act and speak exactly alike.. you drink from the same vat of kool aid and that's just the way it is kid.

 

[Wiseacre]

There are people called ideologues, who cannot accept any ideals or values but their own. No other point of view can have any credence, and anyone who disagrees is a fool or a villain. Such people can make sweeping generalizations without thinking twice. Maybe without thinking once. It's easier that way, no critical thinking required.

 

[Inthemiddle]

because each and everyone of you think, act and speak exactly alike.. you drink from the same vat of kool aid and that's just the way it is kid.

 

[CaféAuLait]

Why do wingnuts unquestionably make sweeping generalizations about the opposition?


Isn't your question a "sweeping generalization"?

 

[The Infidel]

I guess that's what makes them wingnuts.

they want the world to be simple.

They cant live in the adult world

Why do wingnuts unquestionably make sweeping generalizations about the opposition?


Isn't your question a "sweeping generalization"?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Your answer is in your topic title.

Wingnuts..... Says all that needs to be said about your ability to articulate an argument against those you disagree with.

 

[Inthemiddle]

Question is, can an inclination to make sweeping generalizations be considered to be part of the definition of a "wing-nut"?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

There are people called ideologues, who cannot accept any ideals or values but their own. No other point of view can have any credence, and anyone who disagrees is a fool or a villain. Such people can make sweeping generalizations without thinking twice. Maybe without thinking once. It's easier that way, no critical thinking required.

Did you even notice the "generalization in his topic title for an idea about his own generalizations?

 

[healthmyths]

Why do wingnuts unquestionably make sweeping generalizations about the opposition?


Isn't your question a "sweeping generalization"?

You are so right!

This title reminds me of the idiot who said "I take great pride in my humility"!
Or that other adage that fits to T..

It is better to be thought a fool .. then write/open mouth and prove IT!!!

 

[Wiseacre]

There are people called ideologues, who cannot accept any ideals or values but their own. No other point of view can have any credence, and anyone who disagrees is a fool or a villain. Such people can make sweeping generalizations without thinking twice. Maybe without thinking once. It's easier that way, no critical thinking required.

Did you even notice the "generalization in his topic title for an idea about his own generalizations?

Naw, not that smart I guess. I just think in general that people who make generalizations about other people in general are generally making false generalizations because they generally don't want to make the effort to understand what those people are thinking. In general.

I need a beer to help me rethink my position. In general.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

There are people called ideologues, who cannot accept any ideals or values but their own. No other point of view can have any credence, and anyone who disagrees is a fool or a villain. Such people can make sweeping generalizations without thinking twice. Maybe without thinking once. It's easier that way, no critical thinking required.

Did you even notice the "generalization in his topic title for an idea about his own generalizations?

Naw, not that smart I guess. I just think in general that people who make generalizations about other people in general are generally making false generalizations because they generally don't want to make the effort to understand what those people are thinking. In general.

I need a beer to help me rethink my position. In general.

Ha! I just cracked one myself. I've spent the last 4 hours rewiring my home theatre system. Had to pull up too much damn carpet. Monster cable for my sub cost me 50 bucks and the damn thing was about a foot short of making it to where I wanted it.

Gramps-0
Cable-1
12 pack-in serious trouble

 

[BDBoop]

Question is, can an inclination to make sweeping generalizations be considered to be part of the definition of a "wing-nut"?

Yes.

 

[Dot Com]

Thats what happens when they only have two channels to watch- FOX & CNBC to reinforce their Randian worldview.

 

[code1211]

I guess that's what makes them wingnuts.

Just out of curiosity, what about your statement is not a sweeping generalization?

 

[Inthemiddle]

I guess that's what makes them wingnuts.

Just out of curiosity, what about your statement is not a sweeping generalization?

Attaching a trait, via definition, is not a "sweeping generalization" in the sense that the phrase is used within the context of this discussion. That context being one of inappropriate generalization. If I said that all dogs are mammals, that would certainly be a "sweeping" generalization, technically speaking. But such a declaration identifies a defining quality of dogs, and as such is a quite different thing then an inappropriate generalization about dogs. For example, saying "all dogs are filthy and dangerous animals."


Here's my response to the OP:

Many people make inappropriate generalizations. Those who do, do so for a variety of reasons. There's prejudice, bigotry and hatred, accidental ignorance, willful ignorance, intellectual laziness, intentional incitement, grandiosity of self, and others I'm sure. As you'll note, most of these characteristics are not what most would consider "nice" and generally speaking we don't find a great deal of these qualities in people we would consider rational minded people. And most reasonable people tend to make attempts to minimize these undesirable qualities in themselves to some degree.

Of course, nobody is perfect and there are plenty of people who are rationally minded, yet might also have some prejudices of some kind. Or, they might have a mild arrogance about themselves. Or they might have several of these characteristics but in mild doses. As the saying goes, everything in moderation. It's when such characteristics become very pronounced in a person that we have real problems. If a person lets these demons go unchecked they can become extreme. Consequently, their thinking will become extreme. If they have a bad experience with a few black people over the course of their lives, they may come to extreme conclusions. Inappropriate over-generalizations are always extreme conclusions.

Because these people, whose thinking has become extreme, are not thinking rationally in regards to the subject about which they are being extreme, they are likely to further become wrapped up in those generalizations if/when they fail to identify logical flaws in their reasons for settling upon their conclusions, such as fallacies, causal factors, etc. This all creates a self perpetuating cycle by which the person continually arrives at their extreme conclusions on a regular basis. It is, in many ways, very similar to addiction. The out of control demons fuel inappropriate generalizations, which then fuel fangled logical faculties, which then fuel continued expression of those personal demons by providing a sense of self actualization and validation.

When people reach this point, where they regularly take extreme positions on many things, and are unwilling/unable to engage in cognitive dissonance or offer the kind of fair and rational evaluation of their own self and their positions or beliefs, we tend to call them wing nuts. Ironically, the term is meant as a pejorative and may often be used in hopes of pointing out to a person that they have reached a level of extremism and irrationality in their thinking that they might want to reexamine their selves, yet such self reflection is generally extremely difficult for a "wing nut."

In conclusion, the habit of making inappropriate generalizations is indirectly a defining characteristic of a "wing nut." However, from a causal point of view, I think this should be viewed within the appropriate context. Perhaps, instead of saying "'wing' nuts make inappropriate generalizations" it is better to say "people who make inappropriate generalizations often become 'wing nuts.'"

 

[rdean]

I guess that's what makes them wingnuts.

I'm pretty sure it's the inbreeding.

 

[uscitizen]

Why do wingnuts unquestionably make sweeping generalizations about the opposition?

Cause they are morans.

 

[Flopper]

I guess that's what makes them wingnuts.

There are no accepted definition of Right and Left. Therefore any reference to the Right or the Left is a generalization. The Right or Left may include moderates, radicals, or raving maniacs.