Do you vilify the other side?

[Curious George]

Do you? If so, why?

 

[Stanyon]

You might first answer your own questions and vote.

 

[Thief]

and then ask the mods to move this to the game/joke section

 

[Curious George]

and then ask the mods to move this to the game/joke section

Don't care for reflection?

 

[Thief]

hmmmm......let me reflect on that......

nope....this thread would make a better life as a joke

 

[Curious George]

hmmmm......let me reflect on that......

nope....this thread would make a better life as a joke

Why is that?

 

[columbus]

Why is that?

Because it's villainous.
Tom

 

[Revoltingest]

I picked the middle choice.
The villainous must be mocked!

Of course, I know the irony, since I'm a villain too.

 

[Curious George]

You might first answer your own questions and vote.

I might.

It is tough though. I know for instance I do not try to insinuate people for abortion are for the killing of babies, but I am wondering if I do fail to abstain from vilification.

What do you think?

Am I vilifyimg those that vilify by this very thread?

Is it appropriate to vilify another?

I would probably choose sometimes I get emotionally carried away, if I was honest. And, having been accused of being a person who doesn't emote on multiple occasions, it is an interesting reflection to have.

 

[Nous]

To vilify means “to speak ill of; defame; slander”. the definition of vilify

Of course, one cannot literally slander a position; one can only slander people.

In any case, in answer to the survey question (which seems to be different than the title question), I do tend to ridicule positions, views and claims that I disagree with, find illogical, irresponsible, unintelligible or unintelligent, even while I may argue logically against them.

 

[columbus]

I voted "Yes, sometimes".
Not because I ever mean to do so. I try very hard not to confuse an opinion or behaviour that I despise with the person. I am generally successful having worked on that for years.

But, I do get really pointed in responses to things that I feel strongly about. And the internet lacks nuances, emoticons are a poor substitute for the range of subtle cues. It's easy for people to interpret a harsh criticism of a behavior or opinion, that they identify with, as personal when it isn't ( At least not to me).
So, especially in hot button topics like Trump or abortion, I am very capable of posting things that look like vilification. I will use terms like Basket of Deplorables and knee jerk baby killers. I don't really mean to vilify them because I am sure that some of them are fine people.
Tom

 

[Revoltingest]

To vilify means “to speak ill of; defame; slander”. the definition of vilify

Of course, one cannot literally slander a position; one can only slander people.

In any case, in answer to the survey question (which seems to be different than the title question), I do tend to ridicule positions, views and claims that I disagree with, find illogical, irresponsible, unintelligible or unintelligent, even while I may argue logically against them.

By speaking ill of someone or something, I'm "vilifying" them.
No slander, defamation or libel needed.

 

[YmirGF]

To vilify means “to speak ill of; defame; slander”. the definition of vilify

Of course, one cannot literally slander a position; one can only slander people.

In any case, in answer to the survey question (which seems to be different than the title question), I do tend to ridicule positions, views and claims that I disagree with, find illogical, irresponsible, unintelligible or unintelligent, even while I may argue logically against them.

I agree. I have no problem with ridiculing a given position but will only rarely ridicule the person. I usually give clear signs that an ***-whoopin' is nearing and rarely have to go there. My normal response is to wish them a nice fricken day and get back to reality. Life is too short for some things.

 

[Nous]

By speaking ill of someone or something, I'm "vilifying" them.
No slander, defamation or libel needed.

The survey question only asked whether one vilifies "other positions in an argument". That's the only question I answered.

 

[Nous]

I agree. I have no problem with ridiculing a given position but will only rarely ridicule the person. I usually give clear signs that an ***-whoopin' is nearing and rarely have to go there. My normal response is to wish them a nice fricken day and get back to reality. Life is too short for some things.

We should all be as level-headed as you.

 

[Revoltingest]

The survey question only asked whether one vilifies "other positions in an argument". That's the only question I answered.

And since "vilify" has a range of definitions,
I pointed out the one I favored.

 

[Brickjectivity]

I have difficulty viewing all beings as sentient, but I do not verbally vilify. That is a pointless exercise. It would be like Eastwood talking to an empty chair sort of. Also a non-sentient being would not comprehend the insult in a constructive way.

 

[Curious George]

The survey question only asked whether one vilifies "other positions in an argument". That's the only question I answered.

Yes. To vilify a position is to say that those who take up such a position are villains.

Forgive my poor wording if this is not clear.

 

[Curious George]

I have difficulty viewing all beings as sentient, but I do not verbally vilify. That is a pointless exercise. It would be like Eastwood talking to an empty chair sort of. Also a non-sentient being would not comprehend the insult in a constructive way.

How so?

 

[Aldrnari]

Everyone vilifies something. Serial killing, rape, and genocide are things that I think everyone can agree are especially heinous, and should be vilified.

That said, if we are talking about political or religious views, not likely. If I'm asking someone tough questions or making tough points, it's generally because I respect the person's opinion.