What are your thoughts on cancel culture?
#cancelled
What are your thoughts on cancel culture?
The Barnum or Forer effect is the tendency for people to judge that general, universally valid statements about personality are actually specific descriptions of their own personalities. A "universally valid" statement is one that is true of everyone—or, more likely, nearly everyone. It is not known why people tend to make such misjudgments, but the effect has been experimentally reproduced.
The psychologist Paul Meehl named this fallacy "the P.T. Barnum effect" because Barnum built his circus and dime museum on the principle of having something for everyone. It is also called "the Forer effect" after its discoverer, the psychologist Bertram R. Forer, who modestly dubbed it "the fallacy of personal validation".
Originally Posted by one
I 100% agree with this, I guess it's a contradiction but I think people who try to start to cancel people should be banned for harassment on social media. I think even if you disagree with someone you don't have to shun them or shut them out, or even worse try to get them fired at their job. Like why are you trying to take food out of their mouths for disagreeing with you?
The most frustrating thing is that they feel completely justified in doing this.
People need to open their minds up, I blame targeted user search algorithms for this.
The Barnum or Forer effect is the tendency for people to judge that general, universally valid statements about personality are actually specific descriptions of their own personalities. A "universally valid" statement is one that is true of everyone—or, more likely, nearly everyone. It is not known why people tend to make such misjudgments, but the effect has been experimentally reproduced.
The psychologist Paul Meehl named this fallacy "the P.T. Barnum effect" because Barnum built his circus and dime museum on the principle of having something for everyone. It is also called "the Forer effect" after its discoverer, the psychologist Bertram R. Forer, who modestly dubbed it "the fallacy of personal validation".
Well, I think cancel culture has its downside and a somewhat upside.
If I am not wrong some actually questionable people have been affected by this, I think the original aim of cancelling people was to provide some kind of "justice" against powerful people that otherwise wouldn't be affected that much by their actions.
But the thing is that it quickly became something very similar to a witch hunt, we don't always know the full story and some judgements became way too one-sided, I remember this case where this dude who was somewhat popular got accused of molesting someone and he lost a lot of support, but later it was confirmed that it was most likely a false accusation, and this is something very common in general. I think some people lack empathy towards the ones that they cannot see or relate to as easily (internet users that we only see through a screen, for example) and starting a movement against someone make them feel important, even done at the expense of hurting someone who may be innocent.
And there are some reasons to get cancelled that I personally don't see as valid, while I get that everyone sees morality different some causes are way too rigid and a bit extremist, cancelling people for being ignorant, for saying a certain word, for wearing a hairstyle, it seems way too authoritarian to me.
Ye, I am mostly critical of it (like many others nowadays), but maybe a small percentage of cancellings may actually do a relatively good cause.
idk. really sitting down to think about it, if people have free speech, they can say what they want, and others can say what they want back. But it does get to the point where they are literally harassing and trying to ruin people. Seems a complicated issue. My gut tells me it’s wrong and these people should know not to be bullies, but really it seems a bit human nature-ish. Going to be thinking about it a lot now lol
I think I’d advise people to be very considerate of what they say, where they say it, and who they say it around, otherwise they are going to face the heat. If you want to take on the heat, you are going to have to have a force to reckon with it. So keep your mouth shut, and if it means that much to you, come back with something.
Basically. I think if I was a celeb, or in the public eye, I’d be very careful with my words. Unless you have the support to back you. It’s the game. And maybe people hate it. But it’s there and hating it isn’t going to stop it from being there.
yeah, and they are 99% of the time hypocritical bullies like Chrissy Teigen
Not a fan. It's not just ppl are cancelling everything left and right - it's they are trying to rewrite history and give roles to minorities just to be PC and virtue signal. I have no problem with minority representation, but have it be more natural. Like the Charmed rework, I'd actually watch it if it was called 'Enchanted' and not Charmed or something- because to me it's silly making them all black women just because they wanted to say something about the Black Lives Matter movement. And why couldn't Charmed just be Charmed- why tie it into real world politics. Yuck.
So it's like if you are not perfectly moral (according to them ofc - which has no objectivity to it even though they think it does) you don't deserve to have an artistic platform or your own show. But that's not what art is about... art is about a kind of transcedence. You can't remove all the shadowy juicy details about art- even the things that make us uncomfortable because then you can't be honest enough. At the same time shows that deliberately go overboard to be edgy in a non-comical way are pretentious, because being a good ethical person is part of that same transcendent reality. Or it risks not being art at all, but being a type of news.
And this is a Fe/Ti issue too I think cuz Fe/Ti is better at reading between the lines and knowing when somebody is playfully joking and when they are more serious about what they are saying- but with Te/Fi virtue signal its like 'let's just have it safe and not offend everybody' but then it's like nobody relates to it and it's too pure and crappy.
I even agree the old Charmed was too 'White straight woman stupid-like' but you don't change those things by making the characters black and having a lesbian just to have a lesbian - and then calling it the same exact as thing as before. ((because to the ones who saw and grew up with the original- this is NOT CHARMED!!!!))
You accept responsibility for your mistake, you make an official apology that you were being a white heterosexist piece of trash- and people should forgive you and move on, and then you can create a more original idea with more queer/non-white characters if you like. But remember that too many minority and Purple Haired Queer Owlkin characters probably has the same effect as if you just make an entire show with a bunch of white straight people that deserve to have an Anvil fall on them.
Last edited by Hot Scalding Gayser; 09-18-2021 at 04:47 PM.
I feel like there is only a very vocal minority of people that actually support this sort of thing.
It's a form of Marxist cultural revolution by mentally ill and pathetic people.
lmafo
The Barnum or Forer effect is the tendency for people to judge that general, universally valid statements about personality are actually specific descriptions of their own personalities. A "universally valid" statement is one that is true of everyone—or, more likely, nearly everyone. It is not known why people tend to make such misjudgments, but the effect has been experimentally reproduced.
The psychologist Paul Meehl named this fallacy "the P.T. Barnum effect" because Barnum built his circus and dime museum on the principle of having something for everyone. It is also called "the Forer effect" after its discoverer, the psychologist Bertram R. Forer, who modestly dubbed it "the fallacy of personal validation".
I wish, lol.
You a commie Freelance? Thought you were an all American Southern good ol' boy?
My family's from the South, yeah, but most are too antisocial and/or delusional for any qualities of good-ol-boyism to be genetically implanted in me. Thank goodness!
This is surprising to me too, I thought you were some kind of libertarian. I've really misinterpreted your posts on politics.
The Barnum or Forer effect is the tendency for people to judge that general, universally valid statements about personality are actually specific descriptions of their own personalities. A "universally valid" statement is one that is true of everyone—or, more likely, nearly everyone. It is not known why people tend to make such misjudgments, but the effect has been experimentally reproduced.
The psychologist Paul Meehl named this fallacy "the P.T. Barnum effect" because Barnum built his circus and dime museum on the principle of having something for everyone. It is also called "the Forer effect" after its discoverer, the psychologist Bertram R. Forer, who modestly dubbed it "the fallacy of personal validation".
lol What's that, a Stalinist?
When the right wing does it it's the norm and everyone's happy. When normal people do it (they are all right wing) everyone's happy. They treated gay guy like shit he was some kind of staff at something that's more casual eating place than a restaurant? I really wonder how u skinnyfuck garbo centrists would do in Eastern Europe. Even here some of the assholes managed to dodge getting their share of nasty wounds refuse to associate with the pride parades. Just fuck whoever doesn't fit a particular standard. Society is not about caring for each other but competeing. It's always been like that in civilization. Tesla was part of a serbian genus that got exterminated. He was ill and autistic. He'd be cancelled depending on the circmustances. I really do want the disgusting libtards and their virtue signaling spawns that want to get on good side of the other side because u feel safer now after the people before u made the sacrifices and are making them today for u to be able to do that. All those people saying "I don't care if you are gay" doesn't mean "i care about you". Most of them just do not care how you do.
Not cancelling any one is like saying don't defend yourself. Even when u get cancelled u are not aware of it attribute it to randomness. In fact u couldnt have a developed sense of self if u dont understand what's happening.
The libs control more of the media. That's where they get to cancel people. Oh you can't hear the same disgusting sentiments over and over again. Meanwhile people are getting exploited, suffering and dying.
This is a war. They organize themselves through media. Yeah you don't fully stop it that way but u can be annoying and prolong it.
https://linktr.ee/tehhnicus
Jesus is King stops black magic and closes portals
self diagnosed ASD, ADHD, schizotypal/affective
Your face makes your brain and sociotype – how muscle use shapes personality
I want to care
if I was better I’d help you
if I was better you’d be better
Human Design 2/4 projector life path 1
I don't think it makes sense sometimes. It sometimes seems like a phase where a person is cancelled for a while then people forget about it and move on to the next thing. Also cancelling someone just gives them more exposure and popularity.
I don't cancel people for the most part. I know I'm wishy washy when it comes to whether or not I like a person. So I'm not gonna cancel someone and then a few weeks later I'm watching a movie that they're in or listening to their music. Yes there are certain things where I draw the line at but overall, cancelling people just doesn't make any sense sometimes.
Chronic "grass is always greener" syndrome
If I were to describe myself as an -ist it would be as a humanist or a Marxist. I hesitate to use the term "Marxist" because most of the people who call themselves that are morons.
I don't really consider myself conservative as a matter of principle. I just think many of the ideas and ideologies that are developed lately aren't rooted in anything solid.
There is this mentality that everything everybody does is 'real' or like needs to be examined through the lens of some sorta harsh real world authority- that nothing can be removed from that - because then what are they trying to get away with? But imo they are not really trying to get away with anything, they just want to express themselves and their unique PoV - but like that is not allowed, it has to be approved via the appropriate Nurse Ratched authorities first.
I don't know- art is reality-based and based off reality , you relate to it- but it's also not the same thing, otherwise why would anybody go to any show, play or watch any movie- they inspire you because the real world is so naturally harsh and cruel and gritty and soulless and not-inspiring. It is sorta this mentality also of mixing a person's art with everything they do in reality- like because somebody made a corny joke about black people- that must mean they are racist in their real life etc. It's the opposite of that most likely, people play with shadows to see how they dance.
I am trying to play Final Fantasy Online. It's a pretty fun game but a lot of the story is so painstakingly dry and boring- there is nothing at all interesting happening to me because they can't offend anybody - so like the 'bad guys' are so purely bad and non-human and the 'good guys' are virtue signaling weebs. It comes off very Delta- but I mean I still like it better than WoW still who did the opposite. There story was too edgy and wannabe Game of Thrones and then they got in trouble for real world sexual abuse, so I mean sometimes yeah- a person's art does reflect who they are in reality lol that's the other side of it... and why there's this battle probably. That's why I think the balance is, you should troll people at times, get them out of their comfort zone and into a perspective they are hiding due to their cowardliness- but you need sweet and heartfelt moments too or you just push everybody away with narcisisstic sadism.
The way you just go off on tangents reminds me a lot of Eliza. Sometimes I think you two are just alter-egos of one another, like a Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde sort of thing.
I hate cancel culture with a passion. It's a dumb game rich ppl started playing but ofc they don't understand if you play this game with average ppl you can kill them with it. Or perhaps they do understand and that makes it all the more thrilling for them. It's disgusting. Usually whatever moral ideals cancellers claim to have they betray. They are vile
@FrassatiLo
lol we're both NFs and I guess NFs can get that way- but for me I call it my Carrie Raging. I'm usually quiet and shy but then something triggers me and I sorta kill everybody at the prom. LoL I tried to make myself less long-winded and wordy at times but I'm a writer- and I don't wanna leave anything out.
Needs to be #cancelled
MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
Winning is for losers
Sincerely yours,
idiosyncratic type
Life is a joke but do you have a life?
Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org
You know, having argued against #cancel culture for several years, I'm starting to believe that it could be the best thing to happen to the Internet. Because a healthy cancel culture would break Facebook and Twitter's monopoly on social media.
If anything, it should be governments enforcing cancel culture, by holding commercial social media companies legally responsible for their user-generated content. QAnon posts claims that Hilary is a pedophile — canceled in lieu of a defamation lawsuit. Someone promotes Hydroxychloroquine as a cure for COVID-19 — canceled to avoid lawsuits by family members of the deceased. Donald Trump tells his supporters "Be there, be wild" before a demonstration — canceled to avoid being sued for aiding and abetting a riot.
Controversial discussions are never going away; they still have to happen somewhere, and the Internet is (or should be) a bigger place than Facebook. People would stream out to create new social media sites, dying bulletin boards would suddenly see boosts in registration, and the Internet's old ecosystem would be revived.
Last edited by xerx; 09-19-2021 at 05:54 AM.
In Canada, where the sale of recreational marijuana is now legal, large agribusiness has displaced small growers, many of which are now out of business. Food for thought.
Governments determining what is or isn't acceptable to say sounds like a fantastic idea. After all, speech is violence.
The point is that, in the long term, it would neuter cancel culture as social media becomes more decentralized.
it feels wrong, but I don’t know if it should be eliminated, or how to go about eliminating it. I suppose there would be pros and cons to such a thing. But I really think the long term affects of such a thing should be looked at instead of is it nice or not? Which seems to be happening a lot these days: people just looking at how PC things are instead of the lasting affects on society as a whole.
the internet has changed the playing field a lot, but many principles still apply. But we are going to have to learn how to adjust to it. It’ll be interesting to see the the direction it all progresses in, at any rate.
Cancel culture is evil. How would anyone like to be held accountable for some dumb joke they made on this forum in 20 years from now and have their lives destroyed for it?
Imagine @Eudaimonia finds God and wants to be a priest in the future, but upon ordination, they find out about his pegging thread and cast him out from the church forever or if he was aiming for a CEO promotion but is removed from the company for it, or anything at all!
Christ redeems all
The Barnum or Forer effect is the tendency for people to judge that general, universally valid statements about personality are actually specific descriptions of their own personalities. A "universally valid" statement is one that is true of everyone—or, more likely, nearly everyone. It is not known why people tend to make such misjudgments, but the effect has been experimentally reproduced.
The psychologist Paul Meehl named this fallacy "the P.T. Barnum effect" because Barnum built his circus and dime museum on the principle of having something for everyone. It is also called "the Forer effect" after its discoverer, the psychologist Bertram R. Forer, who modestly dubbed it "the fallacy of personal validation".
It reminds of stuff like censorship and "persona non grata" more than anything.
It isn't new, just old crap repainted.
It's a double edged sword being held by whoever decides to, for whichever reason they may deem fit.
Kinda like here, I remember mu4 saying that those who ask for another member to be banned expose themselves to be banned. He's right, if your "cancel" campaign rubs others the wrong way, you can get "canceled" too.
I had never heard the term cancel culture before this thread, but looking into it, the shit piles high.
The joys of internet.
Depends on the age of who's getting pegged.
I’m sure that the Church has dealt with this many times before, and they’d have no problem welcoming him into some part of the business.
Same with the CEO track. I think Tim Cook of Apple might play on that baseball team.
Imagine @Eudaimonia finds God and wants to be a priest in the future, but upon ordination, they find out about his pegging thread and cast him out from the church forever or if he was aiming for a CEO promotion but is removed from the company for it, or anything at all!
The priesthood attracts all kinds of perverts anyway - but I think usually the ones that can't be all that honest about it and instead act out in ways that are criminal and pedophiliac. Priests that haven't integrated their Id/shadow properly - and are more likely to be caught being "pegged" by somebody they shouldn't be - not merely talking about pegging on an online forum. This is why I'm not against God, but I am against organized religion.
Integrating your shadow is supposed to be a thing of healthy psychology, but I think that is the entire thing with Cancel Culture- they view people as strictly good or bad the way people with Borderline Personality Disorder do.
But yeah totally- I think they are likely to use people like Eudaimonia as scapegoats to show how clean/virtuous they are or to hide their sexual abuses.
Be cautious, as Nietzsche observed, to find the world ugly and bad has made the world ugly and bad.
The Barnum or Forer effect is the tendency for people to judge that general, universally valid statements about personality are actually specific descriptions of their own personalities. A "universally valid" statement is one that is true of everyone—or, more likely, nearly everyone. It is not known why people tend to make such misjudgments, but the effect has been experimentally reproduced.
The psychologist Paul Meehl named this fallacy "the P.T. Barnum effect" because Barnum built his circus and dime museum on the principle of having something for everyone. It is also called "the Forer effect" after its discoverer, the psychologist Bertram R. Forer, who modestly dubbed it "the fallacy of personal validation".
Are we allowed to cancel / fire racist and misogynistic employees? I'm there to make money, not to have pseudo-legal, pseudo-philosophical debates with a 110 IQ edge lord who has memorized some J. S. Mill BrainyQuotes.
Unless it affects their performance, why would you? Just ignore them and suppress the urge to punish thinking you don’t agree with.
It's not his performance that I'm concerned about. It's everyone else's. Virtually no one wants to work with obnoxious people that don't respect them. More than that, they'll start hating me for not doing something about it.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
