Controversial Views

[sacredashes]

Wanna hear what Mr. Covey says?

I think controversial is great, in opening up new doors that were previously closed to us.

"If two people have the same opinion, one is unnecessary. It's not going to do me any good at all to communicate with someone else who sees only the old woman also." (here he is refering to the classic old woman/young woman drawing which I'm sure we all have seen before)

Mr. Covey goes on to say, "I don't want to talk, to communicate, with someone who agrees with me; I want to communicate with you because you see it differently. I value that difference.

By doing that, I not only increase my own awareness; I also affirm you."

Now, I do know that not all of us will agree with what he says (Mr. Covey not Mr. Crowley) but I feel he has a point here that works to my advantage if I give an opposing view a chance; to understand the basis for it.

Apocolipstick, I like what you wrote here:

Now for a totally unrelated topic change. I just hit upon this:

I'm fairly certain she would have taken a lot of flack in the Tarot Creation forum. Some of those comments sound like they could be pretty maddening.

Kudos to the artists who meet them with apolmb.

I don't know which part of it was yours and which part was a quote taken from another thread but this person has some very wise words to share regardless of the context from which it was taken. I understand it was refering to the artist of RWS?

Sorry for the diversion but back to the topic, controversial views reflect what we are willing to accept at a given stage and it's controversial if it's seen as unacceptable at the time an idea, concept, theory (etc.. not limited to what is stated) is first exposed. Correct me if I am wrong but in controversies, isn't it usually one camp against another where opinions are concerned?

Take idea A and let different camps have a go at each other, let the winner be just that, the winner but is the winning camp an accurate indication of what is "right" or "wrong", "truth", "half-truth" or blatant "untrue" and if so, by whose standards? The majority?

Majority opinions may be an indication of strength in numbers but any majority camp can always be proven wrong by yet another camp with more numbers.

I do think that controversy is an interesting reflection of us as individuals and as a soceity; what we are able to accept, how open we are to being challenged in our perception and whether we can process what is offered to us objectively to expand our own views of something deemed as unacceptable.

It takes strength in character to let down our defenses and open ourselves to "the other side", try to understand what is it they are trying to say and from that understanding, allow mutual rights to either agree or agree to disagree.

Just because we open up doesn't necessarily mean that we accept another view (controversial or not) as our own but it allows us to broaden our views and form our own opinions without being blind to other possibilities. For selfish reasons, I would rather be in the know than not know at all.

Ash

 

[sacredashes]

... as Lincoln said, "You can please some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time... but you can't please all of the people all of the time." (hmmm... maybe I've got it backwards... or maybe it wasn't even Lincoln)

What you wrote here just reminded me of my dad who used to repeat this to me when I was a teenager, so eager to fit in and please everybody.

Maybe it seemed to him that I was running an election campaign for Miss Popularity.. but I just wanted you to know, seeing this brought a smile to my lips because it brought back to mind a highly respected Hierophant who is very much like my own Merlin, hidden in his cave.

It's difficult to sympathize with people who play the devil's game but refuse to take the devil's name.

J, this is delightful... mind if I nick it? for inspirational reasons... I'll give credit when it's due, promise. I know someone has nicked your song before but I'd like to ask for permission even though I've already saved it in my file.

Thank you..

Ash

 

[rogue]

might is right

"Our logic is at fault if we ignore the fact that right is founded on brute force and even today needs violence to maintain it."

Anybody know who said this?

 

[rogue]

Of course I wouldn't mind Ash, but I don't deserve any credit for that line.

 

[sacredashes]

J, so who did you nick this off of? I nicked "don't confuse the unconfused" off of a 19 year old kid who happened to be very intelligent but highly misunderstood. Sad how we sometimes read things or people on the surface and can be completely wrong about them?

I thought he was very intelligent because he spoke of stuff that most people don't know about but then, he only spoke to me about them and with others, he's say all kinds of shocking things and that made him look a little different from the rest of us. He was so adorable though when he say something that was really deep and look no older than 16 himself.

He told me the same thing, that he took it off someone else. I wonder how many of us go around saying things that was the brainchild of some other individual, fall in love with the idea because we relate to it in a deeper level and make it part of our awareness.

Think the same can be said about controversies as well, within reason of course? Anyone?

 

[rogue]

I believe I nicked that line from the devil himself, "the most misunderstood man in America," if you know who I'm talking about. Knowing him, he probably nicked it from somebody else, but who knows?

I change my quotes now and then, always somebody else's words. My favorite quote ever is "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is."

 

[TenOfSwords]

He told me the same thing, that he took it off someone else. I wonder how many of us go around saying things that was the brainchild of some other individual, fall in love with the idea because we relate to it in a deeper level and make it part of our awareness.

Think the same can be said about controversies as well, within reason of course? Anyone?

Reason is as much overrated as individualism is, a child of the enlightenment era and 'the age of reason' unfortunately. Humans are highly dependent on cultural conditioning in their conceptualization of reality and of themselves... no ones mind is entirely their own, but as much a property of their social group and of their peers.

Some very famous experiments brought the point home:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asch_conformity_experiments
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eyewitness_memory_reconstruction

Humans are quite social.

 

[FaeryGodmother]

Reason is as much overrated as individualism is, a child of the enlightenment era and 'the age of reason' unfortunately. Humans are highly dependent on cultural conditioning in their conceptualization of reality and of themselves... no ones mind is entirely their own, but as much a property of their social group and of their peers.

Some very famous experiments brought the point home:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford_prison_experiment
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asch_conformity_experiments
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eyewitness_memory_reconstruction

Humans are quite social.

WOW! They are very interesting and very scary experiments. Thanks for those links TenOfSwords.

 

[wytchwood]

I have passed a lot of opinions of late.

Maybe too many. Maybe not enough.

I am starting to wonder if I should just keep out of threads where I might go against the grain, nod politely everywhere else I go, say everything is wonderful and just do my daily draws. It seems I am one of the only ones with controversial views on this board, that opens his mouth time and time again.

I have been very vocal about my opinions on multi-buying, for example. I think the buy-vibe, in many instances [not for collectors] is juvenille. I try, through experience of being caught up in this myself, to try and offer new members advice about how sticking with one deck aids learning. I know that I keep going on about it, but I believe in what I am saying, even if it does irritate.

And in decks that are brought out, I am equally opinionated. I think it is okay to ask questions that challenge, rather than bringing no more to the table than 'I love it', 'it's great' and 'I'm a taroholic'.
I have just felt gulity because I commented on Blue Fusion's release from USGames, negatively. He is such a talented guy, that this outing disappointed me. Did I need to say so? No. But I felt that my views needed to be acounted for. Balance.

I remember Kiama [I think it was her] making rash [but brave] comments about the Gilded. At the time, I agreed with her. And as much as that thread may have upset Ciro, it was her point of view, which was very different to others. And I applaud her for her honesty.

And then there is The Shadowscapes, the bloody Elves, and everything else. I commented on the Gothic and was told I had no manners [because I expressed a different opinion].

Are all these things so bloody great? Or am I just a miserable old sod, half-bitten and set out to ruin everyone's fun? Or do we just not have interesting debates anymore, with more than one view???

It isn't my intention to hurt anyone; but I wonder if I am beginning to.

I don't want any of that kind of hugging with bracket stuff. I just want to know what people think about diversity of opinion, speaking your mind and the fact that when expressing opinion, it is difficult round here to not tread on someones toes because the place is wall to wall with published creators, publishers and authors.

LB

I hope this is ok for TALKING TAROT. I am talking about deck critiques, one deck wonders and tarot artistry. I hope it is not so controversial that it has to be moved

I just had to respond to this. I often feel like this, and have left previous forums for the same kind of reasons, particularly as it seemed that those of us who wanted stimulating debate were in the minority, the majority being a split between pedantic arguers and suck-up types. Now I'm not saying that's the case here, just giving an example of how bad that feeling can get!

I am new to this forum and have met some lovely people already, but I've had more interesting discussions with you than anybody else so far, and I think it would be a real shame for you to stop sticking your oar in as it would be a dull place indeed if everyone agreed all the time, plus I'm sure I'm not the only one who values your input and agrees with much of what you say.

As far as your advising newcomers to Tarot are concerned, if you are offering said advice genuinely with the hope that it may help them on their way, then even those who differ in opinion could not criticize your actions. You genuinely believe in sticking to the one deck to start with and are offering advice based on your own experience. Incidentally, I agree with you on that.

And as for your comments about decks you don't like, I have to say you speak very highly about decks you DO like, as we have seen by your comments in the DruidCraft or Llewellyn thread recently (I for one have ordered that deck and others were moved by your posts as well), so nobody could accuse you of just being negative. I think it's fair enough to say when you don't like something, so long as you're not afraid to praise something good. Perhaps if it offends some people, it could be that they don't want to see what's wrong with their fave deck as it will spoil their idealized view of it. Just a theory.

I suppose what I really want to say is that I think you make a very valuable contribution to this forum and real opinions are never going to be popular with everyone, because once you get off the fence, you have picked a camp, possibly the smaller camp, but that's not the point. The point is that by discussing, we all gain from it whether we agree or not.

I hope you don't think I'm some kind of freak for saying all this, but I think it's a real shame for those with something to say to feel that they shouldn't bother saying it for fear of causing offense. Keep it up I say!

Zoe

 

[sacredashes]

Humans are highly dependent on cultural conditioning in their conceptualization of reality and of themselves... no ones mind is entirely their own, but as much a property of their social group and of their peers.

Humans are quite social.

ARRRGGGHHhh.. For a moment there, I thought you might be my lecturer. We're covering this in school now.. Social psychology and for a moment there, you sounded like the good ol' Dr.

I do agree with what you said because it makes sense to me and you worded it very nicely.

I happened to be in class early yesterday so there was an experiment pretty much like the examples you listed. It proved right in our class yesterday, we do want acceptance by and large.

Now, I know what it feels like to be on either camp and as social creatures we would prefer to be with the winning team but at times, do we ask if we are in the "right" team based on our standards or the standards set by the majority? Think of Milgram in a larger scale. It's didn't only happen in WWII, it's happening now still.

Reason is as much overrated as individualism is, a child of the enlightenment era and 'the age of reason' unfortunately.

I editted my response to clarify this with you because I found it interesting that you would say this. What do you mean? Getting interesting....

Ash