One Valuable Lesson (#IWSG)

      I'd learn a lot more if I didn't forget so much.......

Insecure Writer's Support Group

Join us on the first Wednesday of each month in Alex J. Cavanaugh's Insecure Writer's Support Group--a forum of writers who gather to talk about writing and the writer's life. For a complete list of participants visit Alex's Blog. 

Co-Hosts for July are:   Tamara Narayan, Pat Hatt, Patricia Lynne, Juneta Key, and Doreen McGettigan

Question for July:

What is one valuable lesson you've learned since you started writing?

         Through the years I've taken writing related classes, read many writings about writing, and involved myself in other educational and recreational realms about the art of writing.  Somehow writing seemed to be in my blood from my earliest memories.  I've enjoyed reading since I was a young child and was motivated to write by reading.  And if movies count, then I've watched plenty to get some kind of an influence from those.  Life itself is an education for many subjects and in some sense we are always in school though the classrooms might be a bit different than what we normally think of in respect to classrooms.

        A brain is like a sponge.  We absorb everything around us and within the realm of our own thoughts and reasoning.  In life we learn a lot of stuff, but it's mostly an amassing of subtleties that are in turn processed according to our life experiences and interests.  

        One valuable lesson learned?   Where does one start?  So many lessons have been vital to me in my writing endeavors that it would be difficult to single out what is most important to me.  In fact I'd dare say that the most important lessons are those integral aspects of writing that I now take for granted and can't particularly name.

       However, let me go to one thing that has been weighing upon me over the recent months (or is it years?).   We live in an age of extreme sensitivity to differing opinions.   There is so much divisiveness in our society that being genuine and expressing oneself openly can work to ones detriment both from a social standpoint as well as being commercially viable.  I'm seeing this in my blog writing.  I enjoy expressing my opinions and generating discussion.  Sadly, disagreement is rarely met with tactful intelligent response to the point where a sensible discussion can ensue and dissenting parties can be open to learning and understanding each other.  Being on the "other side" can get ugly in many cases.

       Some of my blog readers have asked me my opinion on certain issues, but I believe that they, knowing my stance on other issues, are essentially baiting me into an uncomfortable situation where they can attempt to discredit my opinion because they think they are the ones with the right answers.   I happen to think that in a good many instances both sides bear truth and those things perceived as falsehoods are merely different ways of looking at something.  

         Most of my writing does reflect my beliefs (political, spiritual, or what have you) and I don't think I am much different than a good many of those who write.   Though I try not to be preachy or overbearing in my writing,  there is almost always a message that I'm trying to convey.  I like stories, but I like enlightenment as well.  My favorite books, stories, and movies have all had that quality to them.  Escape is fun, but enrichment can carry far greater rewards in the long run.  

         More than ever before, we seem to be in a time when an opinion can label a writer as a pop star or a pariah.  Writers fall into niches, as perhaps they always have to a certain extent, but never as noticeable as it is now.  Categories and subcategories run rampant and if you toss in a writer with an opinion that others don't like, that writer can face consequences.

           It's not something I'm going to worry about much.  I'll write what I want to write and believe what I want to believe.   Look for it here at Tossing It Out.  I might offend more visitors to my site in months to come, but I must write what is in my heart and on my mind.  That's life--especially in this crazy social media age where little absurd things can rile people as much as big deep ideas.  It doesn't matter really.  That is until the question of marketability enters the picture.  Then I guess we have to accept that we are all jerks to some people while others will cheer us on.  

           Is this a lesson learned?   I think so.  And it's one that I'm still learning about and trying to contend with.

           Do you avoid reading about "issues"?    Would you rather be challenged to think about what you are reading or do you just prefer to escape?    Are you somewhat afraid to express your opinions about major issues for fear that you will make others angry with you?






         

          

Choosing Sides: Why Do You Fight Your Battles?

English: Cat Play-fight (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

   

Do You Want to Fight?

        This is a wishy washy post.   In other words I don't want to bring up any specific issues about what I believe or about which I have opinions.  We all have some sort of belief and probably most of us have strong opinions about certain specific issues.  These beliefs and opinions may concern matters of major consequence to society or they may be irrelevant to most people.  The point is that there are matters of disagreement that we all have with someone somewhere.   Do we defend our stance on an issue or do we cede to the side with the loudest or most persistent voices?

         My blog often will present debatable topics that have some degree of controversy.   This can be risky when it comes to retaining readers and not sending them off in anger, distaste, or some sense where they feel that my blog does not fit it with what they want to read.   I take that chance in the interest of discussion as well as the increase of knowledge and understanding.  My greatest desire is to find thoughtful readers who enjoy discussion among those with differing viewpoints.

        There are, however, certain topics that I do not address here and probably won't because they are such hot-button issues that they will target me from the opposing side causing more flack than I care to deal with as a blogger.  I don't have the stamina or heart to take up certain battles.

         Then there have been a few battles that I have taken on because I felt a confidence that many readers were on my side and my discussing the topics would not create any significant opposition that would overly affect me in an adverse way.  I won't name those topics, but I will say that the nature of them has been so absurd in many ways that arguing against them has mostly been an exercise in futility with a bit of debate entertainment thrown in the mix.

         The blog battles that I have enjoyed the most so far are the Battle of the Bands posts that I do here every 1st and 15th of the month.  Otherwise I'm not here to battle any issues in a fierce combative manner that goes on and on.   Some topics may crop up more than once and there are some that I may never talk about.   I won't name any of them here in this post.

Why Do We Pick a Side?

          Let me present to you some sketchy thoughts on choosing sides and why we might choose battles to fight.   This is a much more vast topic than I want to address in this post so I'll present them as a list.   A few things that we base our decisions on:

1)  Feelings
2)  Unwillingness to accept personal accountability
3)  Self-centered me-ism
4)  What we think others think
5)  What we think others will think about us
6)  Our cultivated morality or lack of morality.
7)  Rebellion against traditional values or alignment with societal norms
8)  To feel accepted and to be part of a movement
9)  The platform of our politics
10)  What will benefit us individually or the needs of a group with which we affiliate ourselves.

       What other reasons for decision making when forming opinions can you think of?    Do you have causes that you feel strongly enough about to take action for or against?   What kinds of causes will you risk taking up even with the knowledge that you might be labeled in some way?    Do you avoid discussing your advocacies on your blog or do you tend to be open about your beliefs?    Are there any types of opinions that would make you stop reading what a blogger had to say?   What causes have you seen taken up that you would consider dumb or frivolous?   


Thursday #AZchat

Twitter Logo (Photo credit: Jon Gosier)

        Hope you can join us tomorrow (Thursday March 20th) at 1 PM and 8 PM Eastern U.S. Time for our weekly Twitter chats.  The previous ones have been fun and informational.   Topics relevant to the April Challenge are introduced and addressed by A to Z Team members.  If you have a question that you've been wondering about, this is a good time to ask.    If you've never joined in on a Twitter chat this is a good way to find out what they're all about.  Hope to see you there.

A to Z Theme Reveal

 

       It's not too late to sign up for the A to Z Theme Reveal coming up Friday March 21st.   This is the event where you tell us about the theme you've chosen for the Blogging from A to Z 2014 April Challenge.  It's a good way to get a head start on the Challenge and let other bloggers get to know you better.  If you've already revealed your theme you can still sign up since there are undoubtedly many bloggers who still don't know what you're doing.   Introduce yourself and your blog to the A to Z participants.   To sign up you can go to A to Z Theme Reveal.

   

Related articles

• Prompts for Bloggers: Theme Reveal and Blog Hops
• Corker: U.S. Showing 'Wishy-Washiness' towards Russia
• If you could give just One #blogging tip, what would it be?
• Twitter Thoughts #atozchallenge #AZchat

What Is the True Truth?

SIOUX CITY, IA - DECEMBER 15: Republican presidential candidates U.S. Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) (L), gets into a heated exchange with U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN), (Image credit: Getty Images via @daylife)

         Right now we're still examining the mechanics of dealing with controversy so I hope you'll bear with me.  I can almost see the readers of this blog falling away from these posts like heart patients trying to run a marathon.  Sorry if this isn't interesting to some of you, but I hope a few faithful will hang in there.  I've got the first real controversy coming on Friday and that should tell us who has the heart, mind, and will to deal with what I'm doing.

Not the Real Truth

         In last Wednesday's post we looked at the question "Would You Rather Hear the Truth or Flattery?".  The consensus, and I don't know if it was the real truth or not, was that we would in most cases rather hear the truth.  The context of the question primarily dealt with subjective truth, which more appropriately should probably be referred to as opinion or preference.

          Although evaluation or criticism may incorporate some elements of fact and truth, an opinion or preference may be true to the beholder, but it may not be universally true or even a widely held truth.  Since there are so many variables in this type of judgement, subjective truth would almost always be an invalid evidence to use as a debate strategy.  For this reason I'll let this introduction suffice in laying aside any considerations of subjective truth.  Some future debate day topics will certainly include topics such as "favorites" but there is probably little reason to establish a rigid definition of subjective truth.

 What Is The Truth?

           For the purpose of attempting to resolve or at least have greater understanding of controversy we would hope to uncover the truth with a fact based approach as mentioned in the list from my previous post. Am I going to tell you in totality what truth is and go into the entirety of theories about truth and how to uncover the truth?  No way--unless you want to read a lot of text about the topic and I don't intend to write this at present.  There are books written on the topic.  If you're interested in reading a fairly comprehensive summary you can check out the overview presented at Wikipedia.  Let's face it, the concept of "truth" is itself a controversy.

Some Basic Considerations

           I for one, and I would hope most intelligent people considering a controversial issue, believe that the fact based argument is the most effective one to use in a general debate.  Here are a few things to keep in mind when dealing with the fact based argument:

 1)   Consider the source--Is the argument being presented by a trustworthy source?    Is your own personal bias concerning that source skewing what you believe about what you hear or read?

2)  Consider the source the presenter is using-- Are they using a credible source or is their source prejudiced toward some particular agenda?   Data from something like the census or an unbiased scholarly source can probably be trusted to a certain extent whereas the internet or mainstream media could be suspect.

3)  Facts can be misrepresented to work in the favor of the argument or against the other side.

4)  Statistics can be very useful, but they can also lie depending on how they have been collected or processed.   If alternate statistical data is available it might be wise to make some comparisons.

5)  Polls can provide some great information, but they can also be dramatically skewed.   Similar polls administered by Fox News, MSNBC, Gallup, or the Pew Research Center could show very different results.

6)  Stay informed!  Having a good knowledge of many issues attained from reading a variety of reputable resources can be a big help in separating truth and fiction.   It's a good thing to be educated.

7)  Ask questions--If the item that has been presented as truth seems dubious, ask the presenter questions to see how well they understand the claim they've made.   If possible ask someone else who might know--ask an expert if you can.

8)   Follow your gut--Fall back on your experience.  Resort to critical thinking.  If an important point has been offered as truth, put it to your own test to see if it makes sense.

            This is a start and following this procedure might help you from getting duped by a charlatan.  Granted most of us just accept much of what we hear.  Who wants to go to all this hassle of sorting out the facts?  Then again some things might be worth the trouble.  If it's a matter of your health, a major purchase, entering a new relationship, or electing a president, fact-checking might be a wise thing to take the time to do.  Start with the next few presidential debates.   The Biden--Ryan debate could be great fun.

           How readily do you accept things that people present to you as fact?   Do you consider yourself to be somewhat gullible?   What is the most important truth test that you use?

               


         

      

Related articles

• #IWSG: Would You Rather Hear the Truth or Flattery?
• 8 Types of Disagreement That Can Fuel Controversy
• Seeing the Truth
• Does Truth Matter?
• [2b2k] Truth as meta
• Loving People. Truth-Telling: Solving Problems.

8 Types of Disagreement That Can Fuel Controversy

Map of the Square and Stationary Earth, by Orlando Ferguson (1893) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

           Before I delve into any individual controversies as outlined in my previous post, I want to spend a few posts setting the parameters that define disagreement and controversy as I see them.   Since I am not an expert in this study anyone is welcomed to correct me, dispute what I say, or express any opinion that differs from mine.  After all, that's part of my objective in presenting the topics I will be offering in upcoming posts--for me to toss out my ideas to you and for you to provide some feedback, whether it be agreeing or disagreeing.  Hopefully we can learn something and have some fun doing  it.

Types of Disagreement

         This is something that could be looked at in many ways and perhaps you'll have your own breakdown in the comment section.   Here are some primary approaches to disagreement as I would describe them and examples to illustrate them (For each disagreement type I will use the generally debunked theory that the Earth is flat):

Fact based --- Sometimes scientific or historic in nature, but strictly based on proven observations and irrefutable statistics.  On my next post I will discuss this type of disagreement in greater depth.

Example:  The preponderance of evidence would tell most reasonable people that the Earth is round, but there are some who might argue otherwise, using actual facts to defend their side of the argument.

Fantasy based -- Nonfactual "proofs" may be intentionally fabricated in order to defend an argument; they could be the result of misinterpretation of existing data; or any other offering of evidence that often can sound completely credible but is untrue.   If unchallenged, an argument based on fantasy can win against facts that sound questionable or undesirable.  The arguer resorting to this tactic may not even realize the proof is fantasy, but when they are aware that their proof is not true then they are lying

Example:  If a Flat Earther presents anecdotal evidence of an explorer who actually has seen the edge of the flat Earth and offers authentic looking documentation that seems to be true, the non-discerning believer could be fooled into believing the story, and, in fact, the presenter might actually believe the evidence being presented.

Pick and choose blend --This is commonly used in political arguments or in other cases where so-called life stories might be presented.  The convenient truths will provide a foundation to make the contrived additions of evidence fit the structure of the argument.  This approach might also be used when the arguer has hard factual data, but made-up facts are added into the mix because that arguer is relying on memory, hearsay, or commonly accepted fallacies.

Example:    The Flat Earther might use actual mathematical calculations and scientific observations to give their argument the heft of credibility and substance and then add false evidence that would be difficult to use as proof when presented on its own.

Outside influenced --This can be what a friend or someone else who is trusted has said.  It can be the perception within a community, group, or organization.  Many outside sources including media, books, and internet can present things as fact thereby leading many to believe them to be true whether or not they are actually true.

Example:   "My best friend, who is an honor student and a science major working on his PhD, told me the Earth is flat and because it came from him, I believe him."  Or, "I read it on the internet."

Tradition based --A belief that is part of the culture or social group that has always been accepted as true and continued to be presented as true by generations that follow.

Example:   If a tribal community living on an island in the Pacific had always held the belief that the Earth is flat and it was a part of their legends, art, songs, and everything that had been passed generationally, then they would be subscribing to a tradition based belief system if this is what was used to argue the point with one who suggested the Earth is round.

Faith based-- This would primarily relate to scriptural references and their interpretations.  A religious institution or group might even use a proof as part of their doctrine and credo. This type of argument is rarely effective among non-believers or those of a different belief system.

Example:  Both sides of the Flat Earth argument can offer Bible scripture that appears to support either argument.  Some will argue that a number of verses state that there are "four corners of the Earth" or "ends of the Earth".  There are also verses that describe the Earth as a circle or an orb.   Similar references can be found in the scriptures of other religions.

Educated manipulation -- Many accusations have been directed toward educational institutions for disseminating bias, untruth, or convenient fact-bending.  This can be the result of faulty textbooks, poorly designed curricula, or teachers on a mission to shape the minds of their students.  Certain college professors have particularly been singled out as having some special agenda that they are trying to promote.

Example:   The science teacher or professor who is teaching that the Earth is flat (let's hope this isn't happening anywhere!) and shaping the belief systems of their students.

Politically affiliated-- This is especially relevant at this time of year.  Adherents of a party line are often persuaded about what to believe because this is the party platform.   Committees and others probably have devised this platform using one or more of the previous methods, but in many cases a party follower believes what the party believes and does not question anything beyond that.

Example:  Let's say that a government party takes hold in a less sophisticated part of the world and after taking power effectively convinces that populace that the Earth is flat.  All travel is banned due to the danger involved.  Those who dispute the new policy are killed or imprisoned.  After a while there is general acceptance that the Earth is flat and the population is under that absolute control of the government.  After all, some governments strive for complete control.  Isolating the people can work.   The Flat Earth is now true because the government says it is.

Some Final Words

            As you might have noticed, there are a number of ways these points can cross over and interconnect. This breakdown I hope provides a starting point which you can use to examine your own personal views about various issues and those of other people.  Once you have determined where your belief is coming from it will give you a better opportunity to clean up the weak points of your argument and look for ways to discredit your opponent's views.  Or it might make you realize your beliefs are incorrect.

           At this time of the year especially many facts and fallacies will be bantered about from many quarters.  It's a good idea to be informed in order to have a better idea of what the real truth is--especially for those who are planning to vote in the upcoming U.S. elections or elections in other parts of the world.  Also, big issues loom on many horizons throughout the world.   To be informed helps put all of these things in better perspective.

            And what I'm discussing in these introductory posts doesn't only apply to big issues of nations and the world.  Clear rational thinking is important in solving interpersonal conflict, making good choices in ones own life, and even making wise decisions in personal business such as finding employment, deciding on a educational path, or buying a product you've seen advertised.  Controversy involves deciding and decision making is something we all do on a daily basis.

            I hope this hasn't been overly dry or obvious.   If we are going to debate--if we can call it that--we want to establish ground rules to make the experience more fruitful and enjoyable for all of us.  Please give me your feedback in the comments and come back on Wednesday for "The Truth".

           Does the above outline seem right to you?     Would you add anything else to this list?    Do you have a different approach as to what constitutes the roots of disagreement?    Which of these approaches do you find yourself using most often?    Which approach do you dislike the most?

Related articles

• How to Argue Better: Recognizing the 12 Most Common Logical Fallacies
• The "Agree to Disagree" Principle - A Positive or Excuse?
• Is the Earth Flat?

What Makes a Blog More Relevant?

The Thinking Man sculpture at Musée Rodin in Paris (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I've Been Thinking

            Did you watch the presidential debate?  Do plan on watching the upcoming debates?  If you are keeping up with the political campaigns then I'm sure you have a few opinions about the issues.   I'm not a foaming at the mouth politico, but I do tend to keep up with the activities in the political arena as well as world affairs and social issues.  I have a lot of opinions about many issues, but I have had a tendency to keep mum on most of these on my blog site.

            I won't say that any change is coming that will include disclosing many of my opinions and actively promoting any agendas, but as I have been hinting in my previous posts a change of sorts is coming.   Actually it might be more of a reversion to some of my earlier blogging tactics.  I'll explain shortly, but let me first tell you about my decision to tweak the blog.

Where'd This Come From?

            During the Hijack This Blog! project there were two standout posts for me--that is, posts that were particularly dear to my heart so to speak.  One of the posts that generated some of the most active commenting activity was that of Andrew Leon--Is It Better To Be "Nice" or Honest?.  Not only did Andrew's post generate a healthy dose of comments, but they were comments of substance.  It was a true discussion, which is something I like to strive for on Tossing It Out.  I want to see more of this type of activity.

           The second guest post that I thought had exciting prospects was from Stephen T. McCarthy--Become An "Educated" American Patriot.  On his blog, Stephen is capable of successfully pulling off extreme controversy to an extent that I never could because I just don't consider myself that educated when it comes to politics and American ideology.  And also I'm hesitant to alienate too many readers with radical (by some standards) thought.   I did, however, appreciate the challenge that Stephen brought to the table with his post and the response it generated in the comment section.

           Inspired by those two posts I have decided to return to a certain element of introducing controversial topics in my blog posts.  I'd like to see more relevance and some deeper thinking inspired by my blog posts.  Now don't get me wrong, I'm no brilliant intellectual guy who is steeped in the issues of the day.  There are just some things I wonder about sometimes and I like to hear what others think about those thoughts.  I have come to a conclusion that there are many things I don't understand and I'd like to clarify them in my mind.  Maybe some of you are the same way.  It doesn't hurt to gauge our own opinions against those of others to come to a greater understanding of the ways of the world or the world beyond this one for that matter.

Some Backstory

       In the earlier days of Tossing It Out I had a forum day called "Thursday Debate" where I would present a controversial topic and either pick a side or just present different sides.   I would then ask what the readers thought.  This was frequently not my most popular day for comments, but it was often the most fun and most interesting.   I've not totally strayed from controversial topics, but I feel like I've generally lightened up on the issues.  Could it be time for me to return to this concept?

          I think so.  I will not be striving for complete change.  Content will continue to be eclectic and often random.   There will still be the occasional guest post and the on-going nuttiness that I dredge from my old brain.  But I will also be sometimes tossing out an idea, an opinion, or a pondering and hoping that you will have something to toss back to me.  After all that is what this blog was originally intended to be.

           If you're interested you might want to go back to my early post "Mission Statement" to get a better idea of where I like to be coming from (and some of you might say I've never strayed from that).   But if you don't have time to go back let me quote the Mission Statement that I made at that time:

The "Tossing It Out" blog is here to entertain, stimulate, and inform whenever possible. The author will make every attempt to be accurate and fair at all times and will be open to the input of any readership the blog may develop. There is no set course, no absolute purpose, and the content, though at times random, will strive for cohesion and clarity.

         Let me emphasize "stimulate" in the context of this current post.  I want to think and I hope I can find others who want to do the same.  And lest there be any fears of over-politicizing or focusing on American politics be assured that though I may bring up issues that are related to the politics, I don't plan to get into the current campaign to try to sway votes or focus on the current election. 

        I don't want to toss out the spirit of this blog, I just want to toss in a few ingredients that will make for a more savory stew.

         Will controversial issues scare you away from this blog?   Do you ever feel the need for more mental stimulation?    What are some topics that you think might be interesting to discuss?

Related articles

• 6 Easy Ways to Get More Visitors to Your Blog
• Early Morning Breakfast Blogging
• Online Reputation and Personal Politics