Atheists seem to think that it is virtuous to be non delusional about facts but accept being delusional towards people. Facts are not harmed by delusionality, but people are. The last leap in human evolution comes into affect in human relationships, the last part of the brain to neural myelinate.
I coined the phrase factoid to refer to facts that are removed from their matrix. Recent science shows that humans probably use a narrative to remember facts. The narrative connects the facts but in that connection of the facts in that story, it points at a certain personality or predisposition of the person connecting the facts. The narrative incorporates errors and prejudices but in my humble opinion it is better than paying homage to dead factoids.
I coined the phrase “factoids” to refer to facts that have been taken out of context and out of their matrix of narrative. They are less disposed to use and understanding, they don’t have handles as it were. Have you ever known a person that remembers factoids? They have no personality.
Being delusional towards people, means to not understand people and to not communicate correctly and to not relate to people correctly. The same people that are non delusional towards facts are delusional towards people. What is correctly? In communication Socratic Dialogue. In relationship rational behavior. In thought understanding. For example you cannot prove someone wrong by misunderstanding them, but I see people try to do this all of the time.
http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2012/jan/15/story-lines-facts
http://cogweb.ucla.edu/CogSci/Myelinate.html
http://terminclature.wordpress.com/2013/09/18/intelligent-objects/
October 15, 2013 at 3:37 am
You coined the term (it’s not a phrase) “factoid”?! If you’re not Norman Mailer (and so, dead), your pants are on fire 🙂
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=factoid
October 15, 2013 at 4:31 pm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reappropriation
learn to detect your horse shit sir. is his definition the same as mine??? no it is not. Take a class on linguistics idiot.
October 15, 2013 at 4:40 pm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_priori_knowledge
Wittgenstein begins the book with a quotation from St. Augustine, whom he cites as a proponent of the generalized and limited conception that he then summarizes:
The individual words in language name objects—sentences are combinations of such names. In this picture of language we find the roots of the following idea: Every word has a meaning. This meaning is correlated with the word. It is the object for which the word stands.
October 27, 2013 at 12:23 am
Name calling is a sign that you have fear and anxiety about your own words. Understanding people doesn’t seem to be the problem. People who disagree with you seem to be the problem.
October 27, 2013 at 12:31 am
bullshit, can you please support your statement with a link to some cognitive science study that proves your stupid assertions about name calling? idiot.
October 15, 2013 at 4:43 pm
A = A, the word equals the definition, his word does not equal my definition therefore they are not the same except to an idiot who doesn’t know what he is talking about.
http://terminclature.wordpress.com/2013/10/06/voltaire/