Two Officers Dead, One injured in Palm Springs Shooting–Suspect at Large

[Onyx]

I am not getting defensive...not in the least. Nope.

I just find incredible that you can read people's hearts so easily.....that's all Onyx.

Psychology is a legitimate field of study.

It ain't magic.

 

[Asclepias]

Sure. You can see an anonymous message board post and understand that person's psyche. Gotcha.

No person that is all there in the head is actually sobbing about these "tragedies" in real life.

I don't doubt that some people shed crocodile tears for things like this, but I'm not so arrogant as to think I can know the feelings of a bunch of strangers, particularly based on so little evidence.

These are nothing more than empty headlines and statistics. It is a proven fact that you cannot feel true directed sympathy without a personal connection to the victims.

Maybe, and I emphasize the word maybe, you can be saddened by the situation. Most of the time that is bullshit too.

Disagree. Whenever a Black person is killed by a cop I feel it even without knowing the person.

 

[Onyx]

Disagree. Whenever a Black person is killed by a cop I feel it even without knowing the person.

Situational sadness at best.

If I believed in some universal hive mentality among humans, I would be insulting my own intelligence.

 

[Montrovant]

Sure. You can see an anonymous message board post and understand that person's psyche. Gotcha.

No person that is all there in the head is actually sobbing about these "tragedies" in real life.

I don't doubt that some people shed crocodile tears for things like this, but I'm not so arrogant as to think I can know the feelings of a bunch of strangers, particularly based on so little evidence.

These are nothing more than empty headlines and statistics. It is a proven fact that you cannot feel true directed sympathy without a personal connection to the victims.

Maybe, and I emphasize the word maybe, you can be saddened by the situation. Most of the time that is bullshit too.

Who claimed to be sobbing?

A proven fact? I'd like to see your proof.

Feeling sadness for another person's situation is sympathy, or pity.

 

[skye]

I am not getting defensive...not in the least. Nope.

I just find incredible that you can read people's hearts so easily.....that's all Onyx.

Psychology is a legitimate field of study.

It ain't magic.

I know that.....but.....reading hearts or minds just like that, Onyx...

goes above and beyond Psychology ....and crosses into the realm of Magic! no?

 

[Asclepias]

Disagree. Whenever a Black person is killed by a cop I feel it even without knowing the person.

Situational sadness at best.

If I believed in some universal hive mentality among humans, I would be insulting my own intelligence.

Its not even situational. it was just one example.

You are insulting your own intelligence by not admitting humans are social animals strongly tied to their groups in more ways than science can actually prove..

 

[Onyx]

Who claimed to be sobbing?

Figure of speech.

Sadness is defined as a condition of deep and lasting distress. Doubtful.

A proven fact? I'd like to see your proof.

The proof is all around you.

Wake up to the world mate. You are living among the human race.

Feeling sadness for another person's situation is sympathy, or pity.

True directed sympathy is impossible without a personal connection to the victim.

Pity is defined as the condition of deep and lasting distress, being a synonym for sadness. Again, doubtful.

 

[Montrovant]

I am not getting defensive...not in the least. Nope.

I just find incredible that you can read people's hearts so easily.....that's all Onyx.

Psychology is a legitimate field of study.

It ain't magic.

Psychology may not be magic, but your assumption that you know the feelings of every anonymous poster on a message board sure sounds like it.

 

[Onyx]

Its not even situational. it was just one example.

You are insulting your own intelligence by not admitting humans are social animals strongly tied to their groups in more ways than science can actually prove..

Claiming that we are social animals is very different than claiming we share a telepathic bond.

I get it. Posers have to stick together.

 

[Onyx]

Psychology may not be magic, but your assumption that you know the feelings of every anonymous poster on a message board sure sounds like it.

Now you are misconstruing.

I never claimed to understand ALL human psychology. Otherwise I would be pointing out much more than I do. This is just easily verifiable reality, or at least for me.

 

[Asclepias]

Its not even situational. it was just one example.

You are insulting your own intelligence by not admitting humans are social animals strongly tied to their groups in more ways than science can actually prove..

Claiming that we are social animals is very different than claiming we share a telepathic bond.

I get it. Posers have to stick together.

Where did I claim to have a telepathic bond?

I get it. You were just deflecting.

 

[Onyx]

Where did I claim to have a telepathic bond?

Where did I claim humans were not social animals?

The point is that unless human beings share a telepathic bond, the crocodile tears are quite obviously bullshit.

I get it. You were just deflecting.

Look up the definition of deflection again.

 

[Montrovant]

Who claimed to be sobbing?

Figure of speech.

Sadness is defined as a condition of deep and lasting distress. Doubtful.

A proven fact? I'd like to see your proof.

The proof is all around you.

Wake up to the world mate. You are living among the human race.

Feeling sadness for another person's situation is sympathy, or pity.

True directed sympathy is impossible without a personal connection to the victim.

Pity is defined as the condition of deep and lasting distress, being a synonym for sadness. Again, doubtful.

Sadness is deep and lasting distress? You seem to be either making up your own definition or cherry picking one of multiple definitions. Sadness need not be deep nor lasting.

You keep saying "directed sympathy". How does that differ from non-directed sympathy? Is it sympathy for an individual?

Again with your definitions. Pity need not be deep nor lasting.

Don't tell me to look all around myself. You said, "It is a proven fact that you cannot feel true directed sympathy without a personal connection to the victims.". Look around myself is not "It is a proven fact".

 

[Montrovant]

The point is that unless human beings share a telepathic bond, the crocodile tears are quite obviously bullshit.

Wait, now unless you have a telepathic bond you cannot feel sympathy for another person's misfortune?

 

[Montrovant]

Psychology may not be magic, but your assumption that you know the feelings of every anonymous poster on a message board sure sounds like it.

Now you are misconstruing.

I never claimed to understand ALL human psychology. Otherwise I would be pointing out much more than I do. This is just easily verifiable reality, or at least for me.

The feelings of anonymous message board posters, some of whom I'm going to guess you've had very little interaction with, are easily verifiable? You aren't making this sound any less like magic.

 

[Onyx]

Sadness is deep and lasting distress? You seem to be either making up your own definition or cherry picking one of multiple definitions. Sadness need not be deep nor lasting.

Sadness is a synonym for sorrow, which means exactly that.

All emotions are lasting, which seperates them from feelings. The deepness is implied, considering sadness is an emotion.

You keep saying "directed sympathy". How does that differ from non-directed sympathy? Is it sympathy for an individual?

Symptathy for the individual in question, as opposed to situational sympathy.

The only way to be sympathetic for someone you do not know is to put yourself in their shoes, which is known as empathy.

Again with your definitions. Pity need not be deep nor lasting.

I am getting my definitions from Oxford, where I get all my non-technical definitions.

Don't tell me to look all around myself. You said, "It is a proven fact that you cannot feel true directed sympathy without a personal connection to the victims.". Look around myself is not "It is a proven fact".

Then you are in denial. It is that simple.

Your cognitive dissonance disallows you from acknowledging that you are engaged in bullshit.

 

[Onyx]

The feelings of anonymous message board posters, some of whom I'm going to guess you've had very little interaction with, are easily verifiable?

Through logical conclusions, as supplemented.

You aren't making this sound any less like magic.

Maybe I am a magician, but either way, I have an innate natural ability to see through bullshit.

 

[Asclepias]

Where did I claim to have a telepathic bond?

Where did I claim humans were not social animals?

The point is that unless human beings share a telepathic bond, the crocodile tears are quite obviously bullshit.

I get it. You were just deflecting.

Look up the definition of deflection again.

When you said that people didnt feel sadness unless they personally knew the person. That has been proven to patently false.

A deflection is when you substitute a false argument to avoid having to deal with facts.

 

[Onyx]

Wait, now unless you have a telepathic bond you cannot feel sympathy for another person's misfortune?

For someone in which you have no personal connection? Yes.

The most you can feel is empathy.

 

[Onyx]

When you said that people didnt feel sadness unless they personally knew the person.

I actually said someone cannot feel directed sympathy, but rather situational sadness (feelings of distress regarding the greater situation)

Humans do not feel directed sympathy over empty headlines and statistics.

That has been proven to patently false.

Where and how?

What junk psychology allowed you to reach that conclusion?

A deflection is when you substitute a false argument to avoid having to deal with facts.

Close.

Deflection is straying away from the argument in any form.