How do you define psychic vampirism?

[Memento Mortalis Es]

I already explained my justification. In my book, it's a condition, not the action required by the condition.

Oh, and don't antagonize crew members.  

[TeaDidikai]

Bite the Wax Tadpole

I already explained my justification. In my book, it's a condition, not the action required by the condition.

Oh, and don't antagonize crew members.

That's not justification, that's an assertion. What do you have to support it?

And by the way- using your position in a pathetic attempt to intimidate folks is poor form.

I don't care if you are a crew member, Bonnawitz kid, or the grand high wizard of Juhoozefat. Your position doesn't make you right, and when this guild falls to the egos of it's crew rather than a critical assessment of topic at hand, I'll leave. Until then, support your assertion with something and stop trying to use your position within the guild to bully people in order to protect your opinion- which, by the way, is not sacred.  

[maenad nuri]

I'm making this public and pming it to both parties:
Tea, step back for a few days and breath deeply. Stay away from the guild for two days and calm down.

Tadpole, you don't say that you can't antagonize crew members, when all Tea is doing as asking for further explanation. Futhermore, you don't say that, and Tea makes a good point that our crew cannot fall prey to our own egos.  

[CuAnnan]

Bite the Wax Tadpole

Oh, and don't antagonize crew members.

I realise Nuri has dealt with this, but WTF?!?  

[Memento Mortalis Es]

TeaDidikai

He might be. I'm waiting for his justification so that I can break it down. mrgreen

I'll tell everybody what I told Nuri: This, to me, sounds like, "I'm superior to him nyah-nyah-nyah." Possibly I'm overreacting, but when I feel antagonized, I don't think it matters whether or not that was the intention of the person I feel antagonized by. I apologize for my lack of clarity over the matter. I'm not the kind of person who uses ad hominem attacks in debate, and I had no idea I was creating that impression. I'm not trying to imply that Tea is that kind of person, because I know she wouldn't have gotten pissed if it weren't for my lack of clarity.

I've apologized for my end of the situation, and I would appreciate it if Tea would apologize for hers.  

[AvalonAuggie]

Whoa, looks like I missed some drama. eek

As a crew member I feel like I don't do much aside from approve new members and when possible point folks to posts/people more knowledgeable than I am. Because I'm f***ing ignorant compared to most folks, but I do like trying to mediate conflicts.

I've noticed recently that a few people on the board are very strong on debate protocol...and this creates tension sometimes. I'm thinking of Tea and Reagun mainly, and while I am in absolute AWE of your collective knowledge it also makes me reluctant to post at all. I think maybe it could also scare newbies off a little. I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with being able to debate properly, it's a great skill. But I've noticed that people tend to get reluctant to discuss stuff when they're being harped on for whatever logical fallacies their statements may include.

This is just my personal thing, but I think that spirituality isn't something that's logical all the time, and can't always be quantified and supported with evidence from scholarly journals or lineaged covens, and when someone comes along who needs to de-fluff and has actively sought this guild out to learn more...well, I realize that sometimes you need a good smack in the head to shake out of destructive behaviors but maybe we shouldn't smack people so hard that they refuse to listen at all.

That's just my two cents, and I'll go back to the lurky shadows now.  

[Neko_Bast]

I totaly agree with the above statment. I've noticed that sometimes they can't seem to let people have there opinion without some kind of logic behind it. Now if someone was saying there opinion was a fact then I can see where there would have to be a logical reason. Speeking as one of the ones that "got smacked in the head," I'm also reluctant to post because even when I state its just my opinon they sometimes try to make my opinion seem wrong or not logical.  

[maenad nuri]

Neko_Bast

I totaly agree with the above statment. I've noticed that sometimes they can't seem to let people have there opinion without some kind of logic behind it. Now if someone was saying there opinion was a fact then I can see where there would have to be a logical reason. Speeking as one of the ones that "got smacked in the head," I'm also reluctant to post because even when I state its just my opinon they sometimes try to make my opinion seem wrong or not logical.

Shouldn't opinions be logical, or backed up with reasoning?

Can I turn this around into a different discussion?

Are opinions inherently worthy? Should they be protected?  

[midara the happy banshee]

Nuri

Shouldn't opinions be logical, or backed up with reasoning?

Can I turn this around into a different discussion?

Are opinions inherently worthy? Should they be protected?

Of course not. Opinions, when possible, should be backed up with reasonings and facts. It gets sticky when, like in many situations we see here, when opinions can't be backed up at all. Like the belief in destiny, or the Gods, or the way the Gods act toward their followers. No one can really prove that their opinion is logical or not. We can sometimes look to older sources, but even then, I think one would be hard-pressed to say that the way the Gods acted in, say, the Illiad, is how they act now toward every single follower. Often it becomes such a highly personal matter that it can't really be argued at all. At least, not without some hurt feelings and very little progress.  

[Deoridhe]

Bite the Wax Tadpole

Do you think it's just using the emotions of someone else as power? Do you think it involves actively, willfully feeding off someone else's energy? Do you think it's just a disability that is uncontrollable by those who have it, and imitatable by those who don't? Or do you think something completely different?

I think that it's usually either a fantasy brought on by a desire to be a predator, and overidentification of the self with images of power from fiction as part of a Mr. Dark Complex, or an excuse to use other people. I've yet to see an exception to the above.

Of course, this is just among the self-styled "psi-vamps."

------------------------------

AyanamiRei

Any female who can actually see the Invisible glowing neon sign over Rei's head with the label "Too nice for his own good guy who will buy your pathetic sob-story and will put up with your inceasant angst when you call at 2am in the morning."

*makes mental note to hit up Rei-kun the next time she has a good sob story* wink

-----------------------------------------------

reagun ban

Most of the time it's a result of what I term reactive empaths who have very low self images. But sometimes, as in the case of the person in question, it was something different.

Can you expand on this at all - or perhaps in a different thread? Empathy interests me because I used to think I had it, and now think I don't, but I've never been sure how to tell.

------------------------------

midara the happy banshee

It gets sticky when, like in many situations we see here, when opinions can't be backed up at all. Like the belief in destiny, or the Gods, or the way the Gods act toward their followers. No one can really prove that their opinion is logical or not.

But one can present it carefully and lay out the reasonings and experiences which lead to the beliefs. I've rarely had a bad experience when doing thus. The problem occurs, I think, when individuals are unwilling or unable to step back and see their own opinions in the context of not only others' opinions but also historical and religious facts -such as the various Holy writings in existence about the Gods.

I have seen people successfully argue that a proper Blot offering to Thor in the Asatru religion could be Blue Mountain Coffee, based off of the effect it has on a person, the cost of the item in question, and it's significance to the individual offering it to Thor. Unsubstantiated Personal Gnosis (UPG) needs to be carefully contextualized, though, both for the same of the person with the experience (it's very easy to get caught up in yor own fantasies - believe me, I know!) and for the sake of the other people trying to fit those opinions into their own knowledge of the mythology or deity in question.  

[TeaDidikai]

[ Message temporarily off-line ]  

[bobz]

AvalonAuggie

This is just my personal thing, but I think that spirituality isn't something that's logical all the time, and can't always be quantified and supported with evidence from scholarly journals or lineaged covens, and when someone comes along who needs to de-fluff and has actively sought this guild out to learn more...well, I realize that sometimes you need a good smack in the head to shake out of destructive behaviors but maybe we shouldn't smack people so hard that they refuse to listen at all.

That's just my two cents, and I'll go back to the lurky shadows now.

Aye, I'm going to agree here. I suppose we should remember that most of the people who may come here WANT to be de-fluffed, but it's not as simple as giving the wee fluffy critter a good smack with a clue by 4 and watching all the fluff fall away at once. It's more like cracking an egg, a gentle touch, an odd tap or two, occasionally you may need to resort to a harder smack or nine but don't try to do it all at once, otherwise we'll have scrambled newbie and shell all over the room.
And nobody wants to clean up that mess.

Back on topic,
Psychic vampirism eh?

I'd define a psychically vampiric act as someone with empathic/energetic abilities using them to intentionally draw off energy from others.

That's as far as I'd go as far as a definition
*wonders if this will go back on topic*  

[AvalonAuggie]

Deoridhe

But one can present it carefully and lay out the reasonings and experiences which lead to the beliefs. I've rarely had a bad experience when doing thus. The problem occurs, I think, when individuals are unwilling or unable to step back and see their own opinions in the context of not only others' opinions but also historical and religious facts -such as the various Holy writings in existence about the Gods.

That's one of the difficulties of dealing with newcomers to a particular field, because their sources and influences are often limited, and they don't yet have an understanding of where these opinions are coming from, and why they think the way they do.

TeaDidikai

Nuri

Shouldn't opinions be logical, or backed up with reasoning?

Can I turn this around into a different discussion?

Are opinions inherently worthy? Should they be protected?

In a fight between personal subjective opinion and objective reality- it's pretty clear who wins.

Not only do I think inaccurate mental masturbation is a plague on humanity, my path holds that indulgence of such is an afront.

Exactly what would you characterize as inaccurate mental masturbation?
(Mind you, I tend to think of reality itself as subjective. xp )

Quote:

I cite sources to back up my positions and avoid logical fallacies. The most annoying fallacy that comes up in this debate is argumentum ad nauseam- followed in a close second by argumentum ad verecundiam and Argumentum ad numerum.

I've been thinking this for a while...if guild discussions are going to be so strongly based in rhetoric, it might be useful to have some sort of "Debate Camp" subsection in the link list for newbies and those of us who can't rattle off impressive latin phrases at a moment's notice.

Nuri, what do you think?  

[MST3Kakalina]

Ad verecundiam: argument from authority. the "Because Cunningham SAID so!" argument.

Ad numerum: a variety of the "ad populus" argument, wherein the idea is that because other people believe it, it must be true. with ad numerum, there is the added stipulation that the more people who believe in it, the more true it is. the "five million people CAN'T be wrong" argument.

Ad nauseum: what it sounds like. the broken record argument.

Yay for philosophy majors!

here's a whole list of fallacies and their fancy latin names:

http://www.infidels.org/news/atheism/logic.html  

[TeaDidikai]

AvalonAuggie

TeaDidikai

In a fight between personal subjective opinion and objective reality- it's pretty clear who wins.

Not only do I think inaccurate mental masturbation is a plague on humanity, my path holds that indulgence of such is an afront.

Exactly what would you characterize as inaccurate mental masturbation?
(Mind you, I tend to think of reality itself as subjective. xp )

MST3Kakalina pretty much summed it up with her snippit on Logical Fallacies.

Reality isn't subjective- unless you can have an affect on reality by saying gravity doesn't exist.

When one's personal subjective garbage flys against historical evidence (OMGZ! Wixxa iz liks 3000000 yerz ols!) it is inaccurate mental masturbation. Especially when it is done for the sake of stroking one's personal ego.

Now- I don't have a problem with UPG on the whole. However, if the resulting rant of me questioning one's UPG is a tantrum filled with offending defensive whining- it's not a valid support to the position.