On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 22:47:34 GMT, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>Derek wrote:
>> On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 21:58:38 GMT, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>>> Derek wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 21:33:15 GMT, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>>>>> Derek wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 20:39:23 GMT, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>>>>>>> Derek wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 19:36:35 GMT, Dutch > wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Derek wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 29 Jul 2007 20:56:43 GMT, Dutch > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> [..]
>>>>>>>>>>> I do have some personal experience with cognitive
>>>>>>>>>>> dissonance, I experienced it, and at the point when
>>>>>>>>>>> I finally consciously confronted the underlying conflict
>>>>>>>>>>> I experienced a kind of physical discomfort in the
>>>>>>>>>>> brain, a dizziness and a buzzing in my ears, followed
>>>>>>>>>>> shortly by a kind of feeling of relief and elevated mental
>>>>>>>>>>> clarity. The brain will attempt to punish you to stop you
>>>>>>>>>>> from threatening the existing belief.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So, it's established, then, that not only are you a liar
>>>>>>>>>> who had to invent a family of kids to use as anecdotal
>>>>>>>>>> evidence to get your points accepted, both here and
>>>>>>>>>> in alt.abortion, when you try to stop deluding yourself
>>>>>>>>>> your brain punishes you to such an extent that it hurts
>>>>>>>>>> you ("physical discomfort"), makes you feel dizzy, and
>>>>>>>>>> gives you a buzzing sound in your ears.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "I did find deluding myself quite comfortable, after
>>>>>>>>>> all who was it hurting?"
>>>>>>>>>> Dutch as 'apostate' Mar 17 2002 http://tinyurl.com/cmhpo
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> "Deluding myself felt good."
>>>>>>>>>> Dutch Jun 4 2005 http://tinyurl.com/94eq3
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And you wonder why I never take you seriously?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Your history is well established.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As usual, when forced to address your lies and explain
>>>>>>>> why I or anyone should take you seriously after learning
>>>>>>>> how mentally ill you are, you try to excuse your bad
>>>>>>>> behaviour by referring to the alleged bad behaviour of
>>>>>>>> others. That's simply not good enough, Ditch. Going
>>>>>>>> from that statement you made at the top of this post
>>>>>>>> and others you've made over the years concerning your
>>>>>>>> deluded state of mind, and how it makes you feel good,
>>>>>>>> you're clearly suffering from a serious mental illness and
>>>>>>>> can't be taken seriously here on these issues. You're a
>>>>>>>> deluded liar who, when faced with the truth, refuses to
>>>>>>>> accept that truth because, simply put, it makes your
>>>>>>>> brain hurt and makes your ears buzz. haw haw haw.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cognitive dissonance is not mental illness.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> He's clearly suffering from a serious mental illness if his
>>>>>> mental conflicts and self-confessed delusions cause
>>>>>> physical discomfort in the brain, dizziness, and a
>>>>>> buzzing in the ears. He's certifiable.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cognitive dissonance is not mental illness.
>>>>
>>>> He's a self-confessed delusional who believes his own
>>>> brain punishes itself with pain, dizziness, and a buzzing
>>>> in the ears when forced to confront conflicts. That's
>>>> a very serious mental disorder which must be taken
>>>> into account when discussing issues with him, because
>>>> rather than face the truth like a normal person does he
>>>> deludes himself instead to feel good for fear that his
>>>> brain is going to punish him again.
>>>
>>> WAS.
>>
>> IS. I've no reason to believe he's cured.
>
>No, WAS. You have no reason to doubt that he has
>resolved the conflict
His quotes show that hasn't resolved any conflicts at all.
>>> He resolved the cognitive dissonance by eliminating the delusion.
>>
>> His quotes show that he's flip-flopped back and forth on
>> the issues raised here for years, so no, I don't believe
>> for one moment that he's ever managed to resolve those
>> conflicts which cause his brain to attack itself in the way
>> he describes.
>
>His quotes and all of his posting history since about
>2001 show that he no longer believes in animal "rights".
False. He first came here claiming to be an advocate
on the proposition of animal rights.
"I am an animal rights believer."
Dutch 12 Feb 2001
http://tinyurl.com/4ybt3
and
"My contention is that 'animal rights' have sprouted
like branches from the tree of "HUMAN RIGHTS".
They are derivative. They reflect from a) what our
own rights are b) to what degree and how we value
the animal or species."
Dutch 23 Feb 2001
http://tinyurl.com/3ljkh
But within just a few months he started writing
things like;
"They have no rights because the very idea of
a world of animals with rights is a laugh."
Dutch 7 Aug 2001
http://tinyurl.com/6wffc
and
"Well, I don't believe in the idea of animal rights, I
find it irrational …."
Dutch 28 Aug 2002
http://tinyurl.com/47wy4
But then he switched back again, accepting the
proposition of animal rights and claiming to have
signed a petition in support for it to the Canadian
government.
"I recently signed a petition online supporting
an 'animal rights' bill in Canadian parliament."
Dutch 18 Sept 2003
http://tinyurl.com/5aaxn
and later;
"Rights for animals exist because human rights
exist. If human rights did not exist, rights for
animals would not exist."
Dutch Sun, 18 Apr 2004
http://tinyurl.com/3s6pz
and
"If they are inherent in humans then why are
they not in some way inherent in all animals?
I think rights are a human invention which we
apply widely to humans and in specific ways in
certain situations to other animals."
...
"There is no coherent reason why humans ought
to be prohibited from extending some form of
rights towards animals in their care."
...
"I am firmly on flat ground. Human created rights,
we apply them to all humans at birth, and we apply
versions of them to certain animals in limited ways
within our sphere of influence."
Dutch 18 May 2005
http://tinyurl.com/bu7nb
and
"I measure my right to be free from physical assault
by looking if laws and sanctions exist against anyone
who would assault me. Such laws and sanctions exist
to protect domestic animals from abuse, so I must
conclude that they hold rights against humans who
would abuse them."
Dutch Sep 20 2005
http://tinyurl.com/9g3yp
and
"Animals can be "moral patients", in a similar
way as minor children or people in comas.
They can hold rights against us, but we can't
hold rights against them."
Dutch 24 Sep 2005
http://tinyurl.com/cpxhx
and, this very month
"I would hold in fact that this is so plausible that apes
should be granted basic rights."
Dutch 7 July 2007
http://tinyurl.com/328k8h
And then back again,
"I'm not an ARA."
Dutch 19 Jul 2007
http://tinyurl.com/253nlg
As we can plainly see, he's constantly changing his
stance on this position.