If you want an example of lack of context awareness

[Carl-Richard]

JustPearlyThings says things like (paraphrasing) "Women have to be stupid or something. If you're in an abusive relationship, why don't you just leave? I think women subconsciously want to be abused", or "abortion should only be legal if the abuse was one-ended", or here: "some slaves had positive things to say about their masters, so slavery must not have been as bad as it's made out to be".

 

 

These statements are examples of not being aware of how context works as a general phenomena, in particular with relationship to human behavior and the human mind.

In the first statement about leaving an abusive relationship, there is for example a lack of awareness of how abusive relationships aren't just abusive (there are positives as well as negatives), and that leaving a relationship in itself is not an insignificant decision without its downsides, and that there are various interpersonal dynamics and psychological mechanisms (both normal and pathological) that complicate the situation further (e.g. manipulation, cycles of fighting and making up, power imbalances, financial dependency, etc.).

The second statement about making abortion legal only in cases of one-ended abuse shows a lack of awareness of how abusive relationships are probably very rarely purely one-sided (based on the fact that relationships are complex in general), and that investigating or let alone defining one-sided abuse is probably extremely difficult, and therefore making it into a law is probably practically impossible.

The third statement about slaves saying positive things about their masters shows a lack of awareness of how people in tough situations learn coping strategies to get on with their lives (e.g. seeing something positive in a dire situation), as well as getting habituated to those situations and maybe even accepting them. You could imagine that if you took the same person and let them grow up in a Western 21th century context that has abolished slavery, that they would say very different things about the same slave owners.

You could probably find even better examples than this from other people, but I just think JustPearlyThings is a particularly notorious example of this. It would be interesting if you guys could post your own examples.

Edited June 21, 2023 by Carl-Richard

[Buck Edwards]

I've invented a term based on your post. "Emotional arrogance" - the bad habit of dictating how someone should respond or feel without asking them how they actually feel. 

Your post is a good anti-dote to classic red pill. Much of red pillery is an aftermath of such thinking as displayed in your post. 

I'm thinking of a vital point from Leo's video - think before you speak. 

A lot of people don't do that. 

Also take into account IQ factors. Most people who are into rigorous philosophy and academia do not think like that because they are very analytical. 

Most people who think this way have average to low IQ and are generally pumped up, lack emotional logic, are into sports or conservative politics, agenda driven, use instinctive perception rather than awareness perception, do not care to listen or are low on the openness index of the Ocean 5, are usually oriented to shock value and click bait content generation and produce sensational content without homework. They are also very primitive. Classic immaturity. 

They fit in all paradigms of immaturity in Leo's video. 

They penetrate mainstream media with that Joe Rogan hustle ethic. 

I would also say such people lack real experience and fortitude, and are incapable of extra human capacity. What I would call Para sensory. It's not easy to have a deep understanding of things without a psychic-intuit empath ability. It needs ginormous emotional capacity/EQ(another point from @Leo Gura video).

A combination of genetics, cognitive development, environment, culture, emotional maturity or lack thereof and arrogance, throw it all together and you get those numb skulled people 

Unfortunately a lot of these are infesting social media. And they're oddly successful because shock value sells better than academia and Analytical reasoning. 

Like Leo said, our ancestors would be appalled at the way ideas are spewed in the current socio political spectrum. Nobody wants to put in emotional labor.