Racism

[quote=Meiyjhe][quote=Darcurse] You do realize that ^this is applicable for 99% of the Internet? Literally every forum, chat, comment section, online game, review, social media, and so on.. everything that a human can lay hands upon? Not excluding real life at all. Or do you think that the BS they show on History Channel in America (for example) is totally true and not at all twisted for as much ratings as possible..?[/quote]This is true. Which is why when you search for information, you should always check for the organisation the author is from, check things that resulted from a high collection of people or do the research yourself. Most of the internet is anonymous so indeed most information is unreliable, even with comment sections, chats and forums where people use aliases. If you would write reports like I do on a regular basis, then you learn which sources you can trust and which you cannot. In this scenario we are talking about the validity of the experiment. As such, a proper way to investigate would be by creating a survey on the internet and analyse how many people learned something from it and what exactly they learned. Once you have 100 or more people that filled in your survey, it should be accurate enough to create a conclusion. Or instead, you can just ask people you know IRL after you showed the video. Of course don't just ask friends, but also family and colleagues. The more people you would ask, the more realistic view you would get. Finally you could ask the opinion of someone that has the background knowledge to judge upon this experiment. This can be someone on the internet, but of course the name of the author should be present with the piece of text plus the name of the organisation in which he works plus it shouldn't be on a website where anyone can post anything. Then you can always do a background check on that person + organisation to be sure if the guy would indeed have the proper background knowledge. [quote=darcurse]Not excluding real life at all. Or do you think that the BS they show on History Channel in America (for example) is totally true and not at all twisted for as much ratings as possible..?[/quote] Television is NOT real life. It is just as fake as the internet. There will be spots more valid then others like "Discovery channel" and "National Geographic", but even then you need to stay critical with what you have watched. Whenever your judgement is based solely on what an individual had said on television, chats, comments, forums or whatever and can't back it up with anything that isn't television, chats, comments or forums (in this case: psychological experience, own research and/or information from someone that has proven to have the proper background knowledge), then your judgement is likely invalid. I know it is a huge reply, but this is pretty important whenever you write reports or discuss anything really. If you learn how to source you can create really interesting discussions and help a lot of people out with things you write. If you don't and start drawing conclusions based on what a few unknown individuals said, then there is a big chance that you will be wrong and people will take you less seriously because of that.[/quote]

[quote=Darcurse]Yeah a bit huge. I know that I tend to run wild and make huge blocks of texts in some cases, that's why I shorten stuff, like that sentence with the TV. OFC I know that TV isn't RL, never tried to imply that. What I wanted to point at is WHY sth. like the History Channel can go on with the apeshit they are showing as "documentations". They've got the ratings! And even while there are many who watch stupid stuff like that for the funsies without taking it serious (we all watch sitcoms), there's simply no way that this inlcudes 100% of all viewers. Some human beings out there simply have to be that dumb. You don't need to take samples to know that. It's proven by the fact that sth. like racism, religious fanatism, femi fanatism and other bullcrap exists. You know that places like the YouTube Comment Section is filled with trolls, but it's nearly impossible that all of them are just faking stupidity. And even if only a small percentage is that stupid, that is still a huge amount of people and things go haywire if they get influenced by bad stuff done by "Bitch" here for example. I mean, if you want to believe in what the that video shows you, you actually believe in what I am saying! It shows that the typ of people I am talking about exists: The ones who can be manipulated.[/quote]

[quote=Searz][quote=Darcurse]There was that one teenager who got thrown out because he called it BS and stated that he didn't want to be on the aggressor side. The possibility that he made this decision because he simply is against racism itself was totally undermined.[/quote] And he was completely justified in doing so. In fact, I applaud his actions. But for this experiment to work he can't be present with such thoughts. The reason she was being rough on him was because she needed to establish that she was the one calling the shots, that she was in the dominant position. [quote=Darcurse]There was this one scene were the girl bursts in tears and started "admitting" the racist stuff she thought she did unconsciously, I dunno the minute it was, just a cut-out scene from another seesion i guess.[/quote] You're wrong on many accounts in your comments. The above is but one of many errors you've made.. The girl never admitted to being racist, she admitted to being useless, worthless, and all manner of mean things you can call another being. Your logic really falters when you're wrong on so many accounts.. [quote]Totally missing the point...[/quote] If the point is perceived as being that many people other than those racially different experience "racism" (or whatever term applies) then she's definitely not missing the point. It is simply IDIOTIC to try to compare bullying because of fat to racism. [quote]Racism doesn't help fight racism.[/quote] I can understand why people would be against the idea of fighting fire with fire, but what proof do you have of this not working? Because in my experience it can have pretty good effects in [b]some applications[/b] (not all). I am a firm believer of the treat others like you want to be treated yourself mantra, and sometimes that involves being rude to other people that are rude to you. [quote=Darcurse]You do realize that ^this is applicable for 99% of the Internet?[/quote] Of course it is, that doesn't make it any less true though.[/quote]

[quote=Meiyjhe][quote=Darcurse]Some human beings out there simply have to be that dumb. You don't need to take samples to know that. It's proven by the fact that sth. like racism, religious fanatism, femi fanatism and other bullcrap exists. You know that places like the YouTube Comment Section is filled with trolls, but it's nearly impossible that all of them are just faking stupidity. And even if only a small percentage is that stupid, that is still a huge amount of people and things go haywire if they get influenced by bad stuff done by "Bitch" here for example. I mean, if you want to believe in what the that video shows you, you actually believe in what I am saying! It shows that the typ of people I am talking about exists: The ones who can be manipulated.[/quote]There is a big difference between being there and watching it. You do not need to be easily manipulated to hop on the racist train if you were actually part of the experiment yourself. It is true that some people writing comments can be saying the truth, but the thing is you do not know. In my previous comment I mentioned that there is a way of using random people (including commenters) by letting them fill in a small survey. Then you use an overview of multiple people instead of 1-5 comments that pop out. The more people you analyse, the more realistic the view. This is why you should have at least around a 100 people that you analyse. [quote]Yeah a bit huge. I know that I tend to run wild and make huge blocks of texts in some cases, that's why I shorten stuff, like that sentence with the TV. OFC I know that TV isn't RL, never tried to imply that. What I wanted to point at is WHY sth. like the History Channel can go on with the apeshit they are showing as "documentations". They've got the ratings! And even while there are many who watch stupid stuff like that for the funsies without taking it serious (we all watch sitcoms), there's simply no way that this inlcudes 100% of all viewers.[/quote] Of course there will be some people that believe it, but is their audience the same as the audience for this video? Even if they would interpret the experiment differently than it is meant to, is it really about blue eyed being racist, that psychologists are evil and put people against eachother or that old women act like dictators, you do not know unless you do proper research. Also, when you write something and say something you do not imply like television being IRL, then write that down clearly else people will misunderstand you.[/quote]

[quote=Darcurse]Well. This is practically going nowhere. I mean discussions are nice and fun but you say this can work, I say it won't. You tell me I have no proof that ppl are that dumb or that this is if anything going to backfire. I can simply tell you the same. @Meiyjhe You clearly get caught on the testing part and that's a good thing, don't get me wrong. But testing how ppl react to it isn't sth I need or seek, like I stated, the whole thing this experiment persecutes is wrong. The only thing I can hope to achieve by testing 100 ppl is to hear 100 ppl say: "We don't take anything from this because we think it's wrong". But if not all 100 ppl say this (which is 100% sure), it's already going into a bad direction. And on the other hand, I don't see any testing on the other side either. I mean Elliot here assumes A LOT of ALL ppl/ALL of society/EVERY white man/etc. I only see a video made in favor for those experiments with no real critical observation. The whole thing is basically built like advertisement: the ppl who are displayed for a short "interview" on their personal opinion, which is always totally positive, the "experts" who comment, the whole "best of" fade-ins. It's set up to draw the viewer in, overpower him with "real" informations and "expertise" and then force sth down his throat labled as "truth". This is how you go for ratings, not education. Alien "documentations" on the History Channel are presented that way. And she does this for ~40y or so they say, what about experiments/everything else they decided not to show? But not to start this all over again, boil it down to one point: Take the end of the video, the orator interviews Elliot personally and asks a few questions, one being about if all white ppl are racist. She answers yes, while adding that you're pretty dumb if you don't realize that by the end of high school. Someone who never met you, maybe never even visited your country, tells you that you are a racist, while knowing jackshit about you, your surroundings and your upbringing. And he also says that you are WAY too stupid to actually overcome any external influence that may condition you to have some racist urges... If you don't see a problem with that, I can't help you. But heck, I'm sure not to let ppl like that who call themselves "researchers" tell me what to think. @Searz Since you pick posts apart to answer at your own leisure and what you see needed to be answered, I'll simply take the part that is packed with nothing but BS: We are actually both wrong. (But hey, at least I'm not a dick about it) I watched the video once and thought I saw a crying girl saying sth like "I persecuted him for standing out", but she didn't say "I" but "You". So she wasn't admitting to be racist, but criticizing Elliot for her methods. Pretty much saying that Elliot pressured/harassed them. That happens within the first minute. You on the other hand talk about another scene somewhere in the middle.(Where Elliot shows how much she can manipulate ppl into saying what she wants.)[/quote]

[quote=Searz][quote=Darcurse]Since you pick posts apart to answer at your own leisure and what you see needed to be answered[/quote] Don't come with that bullshit. I simply pick out the parts I find the most central and conclusive to the discussion. [quote]We are actually both wrong. (But hey, at least I'm not a dick about it) I watched the video once and thought I saw a crying girl saying sth like "I persecuted him for standing out", but she didn't say "I" but "You". So she wasn't admitting to be racist, but criticizing Elliot for her methods. Pretty much saying that Elliot pressured/harassed them. That happens within the first minute. You on the other hand talk about another scene somewhere in the middle.(Where Elliot shows how much she can manipulate ppl into saying what she wants.)[/quote] Erm.. Sure, but that really just proves your own error, which is exactly what I meant to do with that comment anyways. You were wrong on many accounts. And when you can't even seem to get the events of the video straight your logic starts to falter on many points.[/quote]

[quote=Meiyjhe][quote=Darcurse]Well. This is practically going nowhere. I mean discussions are nice and fun but you say this can work, I say it won't. You tell me I have no proof that ppl are that dumb or that this is if anything going to backfire. I can simply tell you the same.[/quote] The conclusions I draw are based on own judgement, about what I think and about how people react in the video itself. I did not draw conclusions on how people will react after watching the video. [quote=Darcurse]But not to start this all over again, boil it down to one point: Take the end of the video, the orator interviews Elliot personally and asks a few questions, one being about if all white ppl are racist. She answers yes, while adding that you're pretty dumb if you don't realize that by the end of high school.[/quote] I'll not reply to the rest of your post because this seems to be the core. What she says is indeed worthy of discussion. I myself know that a lot of people make racist jokes and that people treat the foreign races (slightly) different, and I do realise that when everything adds up that it will be awful to be part of that foreign race because of that different treatment. However, I also think that saying that you are dumb for not realising this by the end of high school or saying that it only applies to white people goes a little far. What Elliot said is her personal interpretation on racism and should be considered seperately from the experiment. [quote=Darcurse]If you don't see a problem with that, I can't help you. But heck, I'm sure not to let ppl like that who call themselves "researchers" tell me what to think.[/quote] Alright, I lied, I will reply to this too. You do not have to think anything. This video just showed the psychologist's observations on the experiment, their conclusions based on it, the experiment and... an extremist anti-racist :P It is good that you think for yourself, but then you also should know for sure what you actually know. It is not just you, but I know a lot of people that draw conclusions based on false assumptions. Which is unfortunate, because if people draw conclusions like that it frequently causes conflict for very silly reasons. EDIT: Fixed master Searz[/quote]

[quote=Searz]Sorry, I just gotta go a little grammar nazi here. [quote=Meiyjhe]This video just showed the psychologists observations on the experiment[/quote] Psychologist's or psychologists'. The observations are owned by the psychologists(assuming plural), therefore it needs to be announced as possessive either of one psychologist by putting the apostrophe before the s or several of them(plural) by putting it after the s. [quote]I know a lot of people that draw conclusions on thin air.[/quote] [b]Out of thin air[/b]. The conclusions are empty, being on thin air doesn't necessarily mean that they can't draw a valid conclusion. [quote]if people draw conclusions like that it frequently causes [b]confliction[/b] for very silly reasons.[/quote] I think you meant conflic[b]t[/b].[/quote]

[quote=Darcurse]@Meiyjhe I just make this short. Didn't intend to write anyway. It's just comes down to a stalemate discussion and Kid Psycho here won't stop barking. All you say about me doing wrong here, she does. I draw conclusion based on false assumptions? She does. You do too, actually: You tell me you draw assumptions from the video in any way? They're ofc positive, since the video was made in favor of those experiments and how the ppl in it would react to it. It's simple: One person states that there's this one emotion/feeling totally fixed in EVERY human's mind, something that is more fickle than anything will know. I state, for myself at least, that this is a lie. That I'm not even in the slightest way having that emotion. I could be lying of course, but except for her, I wouldn't do it on a completely groundless basis. --- @Searz try to pipe down on the douche part. I won't use a term like grammar nazi but instead of spewing ONLY insults and correcting trivial spelling mistakes, you may type down sth. that's actual worth reading and stop writting stuff you only have to courage to because you hide behind your screen. You insulted me for stuff being wrong, stuff that's like 95% opinion, only for being totally clueless yourself on the one thing I misheard and thus was halfly wrong about. Dunno if you do this whole thing because you want to sound smart. You sure don't.[/quote]

[quote=Searz][quote=Darcurse] I won't use a term like grammar nazi but instead of spewing ONLY insults [...] You insulted me for stuff being wrong, stuff that's like 95% opinion, only for being totally clueless yourself on the one thing I misheard and thus was halfly wrong about.[/quote] Are you kidding me? Pretty much the [b]only[/b] negative things I've written about you in this thread are "[color=#00ffff]I don't quite think you grasped the situation[/color]", "[color=#0080ff]Your logic really falters when you're wrong on so many accounts..[/color]" and "[color=#00ff00]You're wrong on many accounts in your comments. The above is but one of many errors you've made[/color]". Those are literally the only things I've written directed at you. Did you even bother to check before writing that comment? [b]You're wrong yet again. You're factually wrong time and time again. This only goes to show how unsteady a ground your conclusions stand on. Please get your facts straight if you want to discuss.[/b][/quote]