Boston Bombing

[LR1955]

Cognitive disconnect at its finest.

Cognitive 'disconnect'?

Not heard of that one. Something new?

Not trying to be a 'dick' about it. Just wondering....

LR1955

[JASmith]

Cognitive 'disconnect'?

Not heard of that one. Something new?
LR1955

This seems to be a new term with the best definition I've seen coming from the blog http://realkansas.blogspot.com/2005_12_01_archive.html. The definition they use is "The term, cognitive disconnect, applies to the condition where reality and one's understanding or perception of reality differ." The blog continues to cite a number of examples that further clarify.

[LR1955]

This seems to be a new term with the best definition I've seen coming from the blog http://realkansas.blogspot.com/2005_12_01_archive.html. The definition they use is "The term, cognitive disconnect, applies to the condition where reality and one's understanding or perception of reality differ." The blog continues to cite a number of examples that further clarify.

JAS.

I was more looking for an accepted psychological theory.

Do you think he meant Cognitive Dissonance Theory (Festinger, 1957)?

LR1955

[JASmith]

LR,

I was at one time familiar with the term Cognitive Dissonance at the Scientific American level. My recollection of that term is that it refers to the change in perceived value of an object or relationship based on whether the possession or relationship is viable.

I suspect he really meant that some of us do have a disconnect between our perception of reality and what really exists. Further, even though I cannot authoritatively cite a proper lay (or professional) term for the condition, I am absolutely convinced it happens to all of us in varying degrees.

JAS

[LR1955]

LR,

I was at one time familiar with the term Cognitive Dissonance at the Scientific American level. My recollection of that term is that it refers to the change in perceived value of an object or relationship based on whether the possession or relationship is viable.

I suspect he really meant that some of us do have a disconnect between our perception of reality and what really exists. Further, even though I cannot authoritatively cite a proper lay (or professional) term for the condition, I am absolutely convinced it happens to all of us in varying degrees.

JAS

Joe:

I was more on the lines of thinking of how people rationalize dissonant cognitions so as to maintain a psychological homeostasis. I think it would fit in this particular circumstance but I also think your explanation fits better.

Being disconnected from reality is a pathological condition. I have seen 'disconnect' and 'cognition' used together when discussing Schizophrenia, for example. But never has the word 'cognitive' been capitalized in these situations unless it was at the beginning of a sentence. Note that TOMIB capitalized 'cognitive' as if it were a name.

So, let the games start again!

The last comments of this intellectual argument consisted of TOMIB calling Stan a 'dick'.

OK Stan, your shot!

LR1955

[stanc]

Thanks, Gene. I think I'll pass.

[Von Gruff]

Entertaining and edumacational at the same time

[TheOTHERmaninblack]

Joe:

I was more on the lines of thinking of how people rationalize dissonant cognitions so as to maintain a psychological homeostasis. I think it would fit in this particular circumstance but I also think your explanation fits better.

Being disconnected from reality is a pathological condition. I have seen 'disconnect' and 'cognition' used together when discussing Schizophrenia, for example. But never has the word 'cognitive' been capitalized in these situations unless it was at the beginning of a sentence. Note that TOMIB capitalized 'cognitive' as if it were a name.

So, let the games start again!

The last comments of this intellectual argument consisted of TOMIB calling Stan a 'dick'.

OK Stan, your shot!

LR1955

I capitalized cognitive because it was at the beginning of a sentence. Granted, the sentence was more a sentence fragment, but that's just the way I write. I'm of the school that believes punctuation to be more an art than a science.


Cognitive disconnect, as I see it, and apart from cognitive dissonance, is the intellectual separation of two conflicting lines of reasoning, but without either the discomfort, or the realization. As though each belief existed complete and separate from any of the others.

So, a person could, for example, hold that all life is sacred, but be completely behind late term abortion and not feel an instant's doubt that either position is any less valid than the other. A kind of compartmentalization. Indeed, if pressed, such folk grow confused that the two concepts might be considered together or affect one another.

To be honest, I've been using the term for so long that I cannot really remember where I first learned it. I will admit to some surprise that you guys hadn't heard it used, and that Google seems to be unaware of it. Maybe I just hang around too many sociopaths :p

In terms of forum habitation, it (albeit tenuously and on a much lower level) could also account for the way that some people treat each thread as though it were its own unique universe, completely divorced from any other thread/sub-forum/forum, and allowing no bleedover of concepts or citation that doesn't exist within its own internal structure.

And to be perfectly fair, I did not actually call Stan a dick. I asked Stan if he was being a dick. A fine point, I'll admit, but still a point.

[stanc]

Not an unexpected response. Kind of typical, really.

Okay, I'll play one more time. There's nothing on TV now that I care to watch, so I shall try to provide some additional entertainment for Von Gruff and others in the horde.

So, polite sarcasm is also beyond your ken.

I recognize sarcasm, but I think there is nothing polite about it. That's rather like delivering a "polite" insult.

Additionally, if you believe that I’m agreeing with your main points, the evidence seems to indicate that it is not I who suffers from poor comprehension.

If you're not suffering from poor comprehension, then it must be your memory that's faulty. Here's what you and I wrote.

ME: The "American way of life" has been continually evolving during the last 200-plus years.
YOU: Yes, the American way of life has always been in flux.

It sure looks to me like agreement with my main point.

Weren’t the NAZIs homo sapien sapiens? Are we then to claim that their way of life was no less sacred than ours, or any of those who fought against them?

Uh, weren't the Nazis primarily Germans? Apparently you've forgotten that the discussion was about the American way of life, not the German.

Relativism is a disease, bud, and you gots it.

If you're referring to moral relativism, I defy you to show where I even mentioned morality of any issue. You can't, because I didn't. If you believe I did, then you're back to poor reading comprehension...or maybe hallucination.

You seem to think that we have no particular right to fight for the values we treasure because values change and ours are no better than anybody elses.

I said no such thing. What I actually said.

ME: You don't have to accept it as destiny. My point is that you may not be able to prevent it.

Ah, the old statement in a vacuum argument. Cognitive disconnect at its finest. Here’s a tip. At some point, you’ve got to admit that each thread in each forum does not exist in a separate universe, devoid of any connection with the rest of the threads/posts made by those people involved. I’m pretty sure, in fact, that you already know that, and your nonsense here is just sophistry. At least I hope so. You don’t really expect each of us to regurgitate the whole long litany that’s been posted in thread after thread simply because you demand it, do you?

Do you really expect me to read through [SIZE="5"]277[/SIZE] threads in order to search for that "whole long litany" of complaints??? Get serious.

The reason I didn’t go down the long list of particulars earlier was that it’s all been posted and established elsewhere, and in venues where I seem to remember you were present. Have you forgotten?

Sadly, yet again you appear to be experiencing hallucinations. Here are the threads in which I've participated:

http://www.65grendel.com/forum/showthrea...on-Bombing
http://www.65grendel.com/forum/showthrea...my-is-good
http://www.65grendel.com/forum/showthrea...the-Kenyan

A quick reading of each shows little in the way of particulars.

[BjornF16]

As a Catholic I neither ask nor expect a "pass." Quite the contrary, I expect painful punishment for my every transgression.

I do not believe that anyone should hate what no man may control (skin color, ethnicity), but one should hate evils that are a matter of free choice (wicked behaviors and wicked beliefs—this includes genocide and believing that only persons of one's own religion are human and all others are animals or devils who should be killed or enslaved). I believe there is a set of objective standards for behavior called The Ten Commandments and that, while there are refinements to the Commandments (e.g., just war doctrine), the refinements may not nullify the Commandments (e.g., efforts to justify abortion and preemptive war and the holocaust of innocent civilians, women, and children).

I do not hate Kenyans or Semites or Europeans. I love Kenyans and Semites and Europeans and so I exhort them, as I exhort myself, to good behavior. If I refer to you as "the Texan," is that hateful? Or a bland fact?

As for the ritual epithet of which you seem so fond, it is not only a misnomer, but is also used to insist on a free pass for wicked behavior, disallowing even-handed inquiry and criticism to which all others are justly subjected. That ritual epithet is usually emblematic of double-standard hypocrisy, subjective, relativistic exceptionalism used to ignore, conceal, or excuse behaviors that would be condemned for other perpetrators.

I think that you, like many Americans, are completely unused to one objective standard and have become quite comfortable with shifting relativistic opinions that are no standard at all. In large degree this nation and this nation's controlling creditors have adopted Crowley's "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law." The people of Boston, a supposed bastion of Catholicism, "weren't too bothered" by their late and supposedly Catholic Senator's blind eye to the murder of a million babies per year. Why would they be "too bothered" by sturmtruppen trampling on a scrap of faded parchment?

It is at the same time both sad and amusing that you are so perplexed and peeved by one man with one consistent standard. In a rational world, it would be the Gordian knot complexities of double-minded contradictions and subjective exceptionalism that would be perplexing and bothersome.

Have I passed your inquisition?

Not really…you should stop looking into the pool and pay attention to Echo.

[bwaites]

Gentlemen,

At this point, this thread seems less about Boston and more about oneupsmanship.

Closed!