Obviously, it applies to guys as well with more of us just being retarded.
Last week, I posted a video of a man and woman dancing in dance contest which I thought was a good metaphor for inter-sexual communication dynamics in marriage.
A commenter then, rather sarcastically in my opinion, asked if it was a promo for interracial marriage. He asked this because the dancer partners were a white man and a black woman. I thought it was a stupid comment for reasons I’ll explain in a moment. Anyhow, he wanted to know if I supported interracial marriage. I told him that I'm fine with the marriage of people of different skin tones. He responded condescendingly. I blocked him. Then a horde of commenters of various views descended onto my post(s) to debate interracial marriage. I deleted and hid a number of the comments from both sides. A few people thought I was in the wrong to refuse to debate the issues and/or delete comments.
Here is the first of two reflections/lessons from that ordeal…
Lesson One: The Problem of Associative Thinking
The genesis of those threads is rooted in erroneous thinking. Basically, the post had nothing to do with interracial marriage. It was about dancing as a metaphor for inter-sexual communication dynamics in marriage. The skin color of the dancers was a non-factor in the point I was illustrating. The commenter saw the word “marriage” and that the dancers were different skin colors. He then made the leap to the post being about or related to interracial marriage. This is associative thinking.
Associative thinking is something common to all to a degree. This is where you make connections based on associations and not their direct linear relevance to the issue of hand. For example, you are talking about pirates and then the conversations jump to Depp-Heard defamation trial because Johnny Depp had played a pirate in a movie. We all do it. There is nothing wrong with it, unless it becomes a mode of thinking.
Many social media arguments are the product of associative thinking. They are heated discussions that aren’t anchored to the topic at hand. They talk around the topic at best and often descend down an infinite regress of less and less relevant associations. How does this start? Generally, some guy has a hobby horse or hot button issue that he wants to talk about for whatever reason and he’ll bring it up if he can make some sort of associative connection.
I don’t mind associative thinking in casual conversation. I do it all the time. It has its place.
But I like to keep conversations online more focused on the topic at hand. I’m not lonely. I have a purpose behind my social media. This is why you’ll often see me ask people how their comment is relevant to the topic.
Lesson Two: The Problem of Platform Entitlement
A lot of folks get annoyed or irritated when I refuse to engage in their non-relevant comments. More than a few have private messaged me. They act as if they are entitled to either 1) a detailed response or 2) the freedom to hash it out with others on my platform. They aren’t.
I haven’t entered into some deep covenantal relationship with mere followers on Twitter or “friends” on Facebook. It is a casual online connection unless I know you somehow in real life or we have some other form of relational commitment.
I’ll leave or ignore comments unless they greatly distract from the purpose of the social media post. If they distract or change the topic, I’ll hide or delete them. On occasion, I’ll try to help the person see that is diverging from the topic at hand or give them a chance to help me see the direct relevance. But I don’t let people hijack my statuses wherever their minds wander. They have their own Facebook or Twitter where they can talk about whatever they want.
Some folks were mad that deleted comments which further detracted from the purpose of the dancing-as-a-metaphor status. I’m not sorry. This is a weird form of entitlement culture and I’ll buck against it every time.
When you combine associative thinking and platform entitlement, you get folks who think they can set the agenda for whatever is you talk about.
A commenter then, rather sarcastically in my opinion, asked if it was a promo for interracial marriage. He asked this because the dancer partners were a white man and a black woman. I thought it was a stupid comment for reasons I’ll explain in a moment. Anyhow, he wanted to know if I supported interracial marriage. I told him that I'm fine with the marriage of people of different skin tones. He responded condescendingly. I blocked him. Then a horde of commenters of various views descended onto my post(s) to debate interracial marriage. I deleted and hid a number of the comments from both sides. A few people thought I was in the wrong to refuse to debate the issues and/or delete comments.
Here is the first of two reflections/lessons from that ordeal…
Lesson One: The Problem of Associative Thinking
The genesis of those threads is rooted in erroneous thinking. Basically, the post had nothing to do with interracial marriage. It was about dancing as a metaphor for inter-sexual communication dynamics in marriage. The skin color of the dancers was a non-factor in the point I was illustrating. The commenter saw the word “marriage” and that the dancers were different skin colors. He then made the leap to the post being about or related to interracial marriage. This is associative thinking.
Associative thinking is something common to all to a degree. This is where you make connections based on associations and not their direct linear relevance to the issue of hand. For example, you are talking about pirates and then the conversations jump to Depp-Heard defamation trial because Johnny Depp had played a pirate in a movie. We all do it. There is nothing wrong with it, unless it becomes a mode of thinking.
Many social media arguments are the product of associative thinking. They are heated discussions that aren’t anchored to the topic at hand. They talk around the topic at best and often descend down an infinite regress of less and less relevant associations. How does this start? Generally, some guy has a hobby horse or hot button issue that he wants to talk about for whatever reason and he’ll bring it up if he can make some sort of associative connection.
I don’t mind associative thinking in casual conversation. I do it all the time. It has its place.
But I like to keep conversations online more focused on the topic at hand. I’m not lonely. I have a purpose behind my social media. This is why you’ll often see me ask people how their comment is relevant to the topic.
Lesson Two: The Problem of Platform Entitlement
A lot of folks get annoyed or irritated when I refuse to engage in their non-relevant comments. More than a few have private messaged me. They act as if they are entitled to either 1) a detailed response or 2) the freedom to hash it out with others on my platform. They aren’t.
I haven’t entered into some deep covenantal relationship with mere followers on Twitter or “friends” on Facebook. It is a casual online connection unless I know you somehow in real life or we have some other form of relational commitment.
I’ll leave or ignore comments unless they greatly distract from the purpose of the social media post. If they distract or change the topic, I’ll hide or delete them. On occasion, I’ll try to help the person see that is diverging from the topic at hand or give them a chance to help me see the direct relevance. But I don’t let people hijack my statuses wherever their minds wander. They have their own Facebook or Twitter where they can talk about whatever they want.
Some folks were mad that deleted comments which further detracted from the purpose of the dancing-as-a-metaphor status. I’m not sorry. This is a weird form of entitlement culture and I’ll buck against it every time.
When you combine associative thinking and platform entitlement, you get folks who think they can set the agenda for whatever is you talk about.
Nope. It's never going to happen with me. I have a mission and I'm not moving off it.
Some basic dating advice for Christians, especially Christian men…
The owner of this channel has been inactive for the last 11 months. If they remain inactive for the next 30 days, they may lose their account and admin rights in this channel. The contents of the channel will remain accessible for all users.