Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 ... 9 10 11 
Send Topic Print
Cat Stevens vs Salman Rushdie (Read 13925 times)
philperth2010
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 19597
Perth
Gender: male
Re: Cat Stevens vs Salman Rushdie
Reply #150 - Apr 17th, 2018 at 6:52pm
 
freediver wrote on Apr 17th, 2018 at 2:28pm:
Auggie, its in the op.

philperth2010 wrote on Apr 17th, 2018 at 12:37pm:
Freediver wrote....
Quote:
So spot and phil have no problem with Muslims calling for the death of people who criticise Islam, so long as there is some vague, unspoken desire to also get the paperwork in order?

Do you actually believe cat never called for Rushdie's death?


I believe all religion is crap but I prefer to let people speak for themselves???

Huh Huh Huh

With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Steven Weinberg (1933 - ), quoted in The New York Times, April 20, 1999


Do you believe what they say?


I believe Cat Stevens gave a perfectly reasonable explanation about his comment....Why shouldn't I believe him....His full response can be found in the link below if you are bothered to read it???

Huh Huh Huh

https://www.news24.com/Columnists/GuestColumn/i-never-called-for-the-death-of-sa...
Back to top
 

If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them.
Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)
 
IP Logged
 
Auggie
Gold Member
*****
Offline


The Bull Moose

Posts: 8571
Re: Cat Stevens vs Salman Rushdie
Reply #151 - Apr 17th, 2018 at 6:55pm
 
philperth2010 wrote on Apr 17th, 2018 at 6:52pm:
freediver wrote on Apr 17th, 2018 at 2:28pm:
Auggie, its in the op.

philperth2010 wrote on Apr 17th, 2018 at 12:37pm:
Freediver wrote....
Quote:
So spot and phil have no problem with Muslims calling for the death of people who criticise Islam, so long as there is some vague, unspoken desire to also get the paperwork in order?

Do you actually believe cat never called for Rushdie's death?


I believe all religion is crap but I prefer to let people speak for themselves???

Huh Huh Huh

With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Steven Weinberg (1933 - ), quoted in The New York Times, April 20, 1999


Do you believe what they say?


I believe Cat Stevens gave a perfectly reasonable explanation about his comment....Why shouldn't I believe him....His full response can be found in the link below if you are bothered to read it???

Huh Huh Huh

https://www.news24.com/Columnists/GuestColumn/i-never-called-for-the-death-of-sa...


The issue I often find with people who make such controversial statements is that they are in a state of cognitive dissonance.
Back to top
 

The Progressive President
 
IP Logged
 
Aussie
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 37678
Gender: male
Re: Cat Stevens vs Salman Rushdie
Reply #152 - Apr 17th, 2018 at 7:01pm
 
Where is there any evidence that Stevens suffers from cognitive dissonance.....(such a lofty expression which basically means....having two conflicting positions or hyposcrisy.)
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Auggie
Gold Member
*****
Offline


The Bull Moose

Posts: 8571
Re: Cat Stevens vs Salman Rushdie
Reply #153 - Apr 17th, 2018 at 7:04pm
 
Aussie wrote on Apr 17th, 2018 at 7:01pm:
Where is there any evidence that Stevens suffers from cognitive dissonance.....(such a lofty expression which basically means....having two conflicting positions or hyposcrisy.)


The fact that he made one point, and then later on retracted it or altered it to mean something different indicates cognitive dissonance.

Cognitive dissonance creates a feeling of discomfort when a person realizes something. I have no doubt that Cat Stevens felt uncomfortable by his initial comments.

EDIT: "In A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance (1957), Leon Festinger proposed that human beings strive for internal psychological consistency in order to mentally function in the real world. A person who experiences internal inconsistency tends to become psychologically uncomfortable, and is motivated to reduce the cognitive dissonance. This is done by making changes to justify their stressful behavior, either by adding new parts to the cognition causing the psychological dissonance, or by actively avoiding social situations and/or contradictory information likely to increase the magnitude of the cognitive dissonance.[1]"
Back to top
 

The Progressive President
 
IP Logged
 
philperth2010
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 19597
Perth
Gender: male
Re: Cat Stevens vs Salman Rushdie
Reply #154 - Apr 17th, 2018 at 7:09pm
 
Aussie wrote on Apr 17th, 2018 at 7:01pm:
Where is there any evidence that Stevens suffers from cognitive dissonance.....(such a lofty expression which basically means....having two conflicting positions or hyposcrisy.)


Cat explained himself because he felt he needed to set the record straight so why would he do that....Some people will never let the truth change their beliefs???

Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
Back to top
 

If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them.
Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)
 
IP Logged
 
Aussie
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 37678
Gender: male
Re: Cat Stevens vs Salman Rushdie
Reply #155 - Apr 17th, 2018 at 7:25pm
 
Auggie wrote on Apr 17th, 2018 at 7:04pm:
Aussie wrote on Apr 17th, 2018 at 7:01pm:
Where is there any evidence that Stevens suffers from cognitive dissonance.....(such a lofty expression which basically means....having two conflicting positions or hyposcrisy.)


The fact that he made one point, and then later on retracted it or altered it to mean something different indicates cognitive dissonance.

Cognitive dissonance creates a feeling of discomfort when a person realizes something. I have no doubt that Cat Stevens felt uncomfortable by his initial comments.

EDIT: "In A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance (1957), Leon Festinger proposed that human beings strive for internal psychological consistency in order to mentally function in the real world. A person who experiences internal inconsistency tends to become psychologically uncomfortable, and is motivated to reduce the cognitive dissonance. This is done by making changes to justify their stressful behavior, either by adding new parts to the cognition causing the psychological dissonance, or by actively avoiding social situations and/or contradictory information likely to increase the magnitude of the cognitive dissonance.[1]"


There is an abundance of definitions Caesar.  I leave that smart arse language for others.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Grappler Truth Teller Feller
Gold Member
*****
Online


Australian Politics

Posts: 79544
Proud pre-1850's NO Voter
Gender: male
Re: Cat Stevens vs Salman Rushdie
Reply #156 - Apr 17th, 2018 at 7:27pm
 
Unforgiven wrote on Apr 17th, 2018 at 4:21pm:
Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Apr 17th, 2018 at 3:00pm:
Looks like there could be fewer people visiting Cat Man Do when he sings...


Grappler is a disciple of FreeDiver and a surreptitious, sneaky, bigot.


Nonsense undeserving of the light of day.... stick it back where it belongs and don't forget to wash your hands.
Back to top
 

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
― John Adams
 
IP Logged
 
Grappler Truth Teller Feller
Gold Member
*****
Online


Australian Politics

Posts: 79544
Proud pre-1850's NO Voter
Gender: male
Re: Cat Stevens vs Salman Rushdie
Reply #157 - Apr 17th, 2018 at 7:29pm
 
philperth2010 wrote on Apr 17th, 2018 at 6:52pm:
freediver wrote on Apr 17th, 2018 at 2:28pm:
Auggie, its in the op.

philperth2010 wrote on Apr 17th, 2018 at 12:37pm:
Freediver wrote....
Quote:
So spot and phil have no problem with Muslims calling for the death of people who criticise Islam, so long as there is some vague, unspoken desire to also get the paperwork in order?

Do you actually believe cat never called for Rushdie's death?


I believe all religion is crap but I prefer to let people speak for themselves???

Huh Huh Huh

With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Steven Weinberg (1933 - ), quoted in The New York Times, April 20, 1999


Do you believe what they say?


I believe Cat Stevens gave a perfectly reasonable explanation about his comment....Why shouldn't I believe him....His full response can be found in the link below if you are bothered to read it???

Huh Huh Huh

https://www.news24.com/Columnists/GuestColumn/i-never-called-for-the-death-of-sa...


Never called for Rushdie's death - just said he should die.. world of difference to a corpse....
Back to top
 

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
― John Adams
 
IP Logged
 
Auggie
Gold Member
*****
Offline


The Bull Moose

Posts: 8571
Re: Cat Stevens vs Salman Rushdie
Reply #158 - Apr 17th, 2018 at 7:48pm
 
Aussie wrote on Apr 17th, 2018 at 7:25pm:
Auggie wrote on Apr 17th, 2018 at 7:04pm:
Aussie wrote on Apr 17th, 2018 at 7:01pm:
Where is there any evidence that Stevens suffers from cognitive dissonance.....(such a lofty expression which basically means....having two conflicting positions or hyposcrisy.)


The fact that he made one point, and then later on retracted it or altered it to mean something different indicates cognitive dissonance.

Cognitive dissonance creates a feeling of discomfort when a person realizes something. I have no doubt that Cat Stevens felt uncomfortable by his initial comments.

EDIT: "In A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance (1957), Leon Festinger proposed that human beings strive for internal psychological consistency in order to mentally function in the real world. A person who experiences internal inconsistency tends to become psychologically uncomfortable, and is motivated to reduce the cognitive dissonance. This is done by making changes to justify their stressful behavior, either by adding new parts to the cognition causing the psychological dissonance, or by actively avoiding social situations and/or contradictory information likely to increase the magnitude of the cognitive dissonance.[1]"


There is an abundance of definitions Caesar.  I leave that smart arse language for others.


Oki dokey.
Back to top
 

The Progressive President
 
IP Logged
 
mozzaok
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 6741
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Cat Stevens vs Salman Rushdie
Reply #159 - Apr 17th, 2018 at 7:49pm
 
Aussie wrote on Apr 17th, 2018 at 7:01pm:
Where is there any evidence that Stevens suffers from cognitive dissonance.....(such a lofty expression which basically means....having two conflicting positions or hyposcrisy.)


People do not "suffer" from cognitive dissidence, it is not an affliction, it is a description of stupidity, where a lying twat says any shite no matter how contradictory it is.

It would be like I suffer from smart arsery, as nif me being a smart arse is a mental disease I suffer from.
No, it is a choice I make, and those around me have to suffer it.

Same diff.

Cat is full of crap. I watched it the first time, I know what he said, I watched him say it.
I know what he meant, he was not unclear, or "joking" as he now lies.
100% gold plated take it to the bank, utter bald faced lying fricking muslom BS.
And that folks is the Alpha and Omega of this whole argument.
Back to top
 

OOPS!!! My Karma, ran over your Dogma!
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: Cat Stevens vs Salman Rushdie
Reply #160 - Apr 18th, 2018 at 8:17am
 
philperth2010 wrote on Apr 17th, 2018 at 6:52pm:
freediver wrote on Apr 17th, 2018 at 2:28pm:
Auggie, its in the op.

philperth2010 wrote on Apr 17th, 2018 at 12:37pm:
Freediver wrote....
Quote:
So spot and phil have no problem with Muslims calling for the death of people who criticise Islam, so long as there is some vague, unspoken desire to also get the paperwork in order?

Do you actually believe cat never called for Rushdie's death?


I believe all religion is crap but I prefer to let people speak for themselves???

Huh Huh Huh

With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Steven Weinberg (1933 - ), quoted in The New York Times, April 20, 1999


Do you believe what they say?


I believe Cat Stevens gave a perfectly reasonable explanation about his comment....Why shouldn't I believe him....His full response can be found in the link below if you are bothered to read it???

Huh Huh Huh

https://www.news24.com/Columnists/GuestColumn/i-never-called-for-the-death-of-sa...


Do you believe his claim that he did not call for Rushdie's death?
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Cat Stevens vs Salman Rushdie
Reply #161 - Apr 18th, 2018 at 10:48am
 
mozzaok wrote on Apr 17th, 2018 at 7:49pm:
Aussie wrote on Apr 17th, 2018 at 7:01pm:
Where is there any evidence that Stevens suffers from cognitive dissonance.....(such a lofty expression which basically means....having two conflicting positions or hyposcrisy.)


People do not "suffer" from cognitive dissidence, it is not an affliction, it is a description of stupidity, where a lying twat says any shite no matter how contradictory it is.

It would be like I suffer from smart arsery, as nif me being a smart arse is a mental disease I suffer from.
No, it is a choice I make, and those around me have to suffer it.

Same diff.

Cat is full of crap. I watched it the first time, I know what he said, I watched him say it.
I know what he meant, he was not unclear, or "joking" as he now lies.
100% gold plated take it to the bank, utter bald faced lying fricking muslom BS.
And that folks is the Alpha and Omega of this whole argument.


Actually, cognitive dissonance as it was originally conceived by social psychologists, isn't really conscious at all, and isn't merely a case of lying.

In the original experiment, subjects were asked to perform the most menial and boring task imaginable (turning cogs) for a very long time. But one group was paid $1 to do it, while the other group was paid $20 for doing the same task. When asked what they thought of the task afterwards, the people who were paid $20 simply said it was boring as hell. However the people who were paid $1 ended up saying that the task was ok, or even interesting. Why? Clearly the people who were paid $20 received a relatively generous compensation for the task, and so they had no qualms about being upfront about what they thought about the task. It was boring as hell, but they were ok with that because they were paid decently for it. On the other hand, the other group found themselves in an internal conflict - they did a poo task, and worse still got poo compensation for it. Why? This conflict, or "cognitive dissonance" could only be resolved by literally convincing themselves, internally, that somehow they actually didn't simply do the task for no reason - and that was because it was actually somehow fun or interesting for them.

Thats what cognitive dissonance is - an internal process that resolves a contradiction in the person's beliefs (ie, in the experiment, the belief that I would never do a crap task for no good reason or compensation). If we were to put it in Cat's perspective, we can argue that he really did say Salman should die, but after that his belief system changed. And I guess short of actually admitting he was wrong, the next best thing to resolve the dissonance is to convince himself that he never said such a thing. Who knows, maybe he really believes it, even if its clear to us its rubbish.
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
issuevoter
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 9200
The Great State of Mind
Gender: male
Re: Cat Stevens vs Salman Rushdie
Reply #162 - Apr 18th, 2018 at 4:15pm
 
Unforgiven wrote on Apr 17th, 2018 at 4:21pm:
Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Apr 17th, 2018 at 3:00pm:
Looks like there could be fewer people visiting Cat Man Do when he sings...


Grappler is a disciple of FreeDiver and a surreptitious, sneaky, bigot.


And you are not?  Grin Grin Grin
Back to top
 

No political allegiance. No philosophy. No religion.
 
IP Logged
 
mozzaok
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 6741
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Cat Stevens vs Salman Rushdie
Reply #163 - Apr 18th, 2018 at 4:50pm
 
polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 18th, 2018 at 10:48am:
mozzaok wrote on Apr 17th, 2018 at 7:49pm:
Aussie wrote on Apr 17th, 2018 at 7:01pm:
Where is there any evidence that Stevens suffers from cognitive dissonance.....(such a lofty expression which basically means....having two conflicting positions or hyposcrisy.)


People do not "suffer" from cognitive dissidence, it is not an affliction, it is a description of stupidity, where a lying twat says any shite no matter how contradictory it is.

It would be like I suffer from smart arsery, as nif me being a smart arse is a mental disease I suffer from.
No, it is a choice I make, and those around me have to suffer it.

Same diff.

Cat is full of crap. I watched it the first time, I know what he said, I watched him say it.
I know what he meant, he was not unclear, or "joking" as he now lies.
100% gold plated take it to the bank, utter bald faced lying fricking muslom BS.
And that folks is the Alpha and Omega of this whole argument.


Actually, cognitive dissonance as it was originally conceived by social psychologists, isn't really conscious at all, and isn't merely a case of lying.

In the original experiment, subjects were asked to perform the most menial and boring task imaginable (turning cogs) for a very long time. But one group was paid $1 to do it, while the other group was paid $20 for doing the same task. When asked what they thought of the task afterwards, the people who were paid $20 simply said it was boring as hell. However the people who were paid $1 ended up saying that the task was ok, or even interesting. Why? Clearly the people who were paid $20 received a relatively generous compensation for the task, and so they had no qualms about being upfront about what they thought about the task. It was boring as hell, but they were ok with that because they were paid decently for it. On the other hand, the other group found themselves in an internal conflict - they did a poo task, and worse still got poo compensation for it. Why? This conflict, or "cognitive dissonance" could only be resolved by literally convincing themselves, internally, that somehow they actually didn't simply do the task for no reason - and that was because it was actually somehow fun or interesting for them.

Thats what cognitive dissonance is - an internal process that resolves a contradiction in the person's beliefs (ie, in the experiment, the belief that I would never do a crap task for no good reason or compensation). If we were to put it in Cat's perspective, we can argue that he really did say Salman should die, but after that his belief system changed. And I guess short of actually admitting he was wrong, the next best thing to resolve the dissonance is to convince himself that he never said such a thing. Who knows, maybe he really believes it, even if its clear to us its rubbish.


Yeah, that's what I said, it is a description of people bullshiteing.
People say that someone is suffering from cognitive dissonance when they appear to believe their own bullshite.
You know the kind of stuff,
"Islam is a religion of peace, and I will kick the shi'ite out of anyone who disagrees"

That is cognitive dissonance in a nutshell, even without any $1 or $20 windups.
Back to top
 

OOPS!!! My Karma, ran over your Dogma!
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: Cat Stevens vs Salman Rushdie
Reply #164 - Apr 18th, 2018 at 8:44pm
 
polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 18th, 2018 at 10:48am:
mozzaok wrote on Apr 17th, 2018 at 7:49pm:
Aussie wrote on Apr 17th, 2018 at 7:01pm:
Where is there any evidence that Stevens suffers from cognitive dissonance.....(such a lofty expression which basically means....having two conflicting positions or hyposcrisy.)


People do not "suffer" from cognitive dissidence, it is not an affliction, it is a description of stupidity, where a lying twat says any shite no matter how contradictory it is.

It would be like I suffer from smart arsery, as nif me being a smart arse is a mental disease I suffer from.
No, it is a choice I make, and those around me have to suffer it.

Same diff.

Cat is full of crap. I watched it the first time, I know what he said, I watched him say it.
I know what he meant, he was not unclear, or "joking" as he now lies.
100% gold plated take it to the bank, utter bald faced lying fricking muslom BS.
And that folks is the Alpha and Omega of this whole argument.


Actually, cognitive dissonance as it was originally conceived by social psychologists, isn't really conscious at all, and isn't merely a case of lying.

In the original experiment, subjects were asked to perform the most menial and boring task imaginable (turning cogs) for a very long time. But one group was paid $1 to do it, while the other group was paid $20 for doing the same task. When asked what they thought of the task afterwards, the people who were paid $20 simply said it was boring as hell. However the people who were paid $1 ended up saying that the task was ok, or even interesting. Why? Clearly the people who were paid $20 received a relatively generous compensation for the task, and so they had no qualms about being upfront about what they thought about the task. It was boring as hell, but they were ok with that because they were paid decently for it. On the other hand, the other group found themselves in an internal conflict - they did a poo task, and worse still got poo compensation for it. Why? This conflict, or "cognitive dissonance" could only be resolved by literally convincing themselves, internally, that somehow they actually didn't simply do the task for no reason - and that was because it was actually somehow fun or interesting for them.

Thats what cognitive dissonance is - an internal process that resolves a contradiction in the person's beliefs (ie, in the experiment, the belief that I would never do a crap task for no good reason or compensation). If we were to put it in Cat's perspective, we can argue that he really did say Salman should die, but after that his belief system changed. And I guess short of actually admitting he was wrong, the next best thing to resolve the dissonance is to convince himself that he never said such a thing. Who knows, maybe he really believes it, even if its clear to us its rubbish.


Is that where your mindless collective of treacherous Jews meme comes from - the cognitive dissonance between the wishy washy western liberal morals you grew up with and the violent, backwards ideology you adopted? Blame the Jews.

Perhaps Phil is going through the same cognitive dissonance that Cat did, and actually believes Cat never called for Rushdie's death.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 11 
Send Topic Print