Ignorance

[Karkat]

This is a somewhat light debate, as I've actually been debating for a while now, and my brain (and my English) are suffering.

I'll pose a relatively simple question, and explain each (main) option.

When someone you care about is ignorant or prejudiced, is the best way to treat them to:

1. Cut them off, but accept them later if they have a change of heart

2. Keep them in (causing possible damage or irritation to yourself) and try to be patient with them

3. Try to explain to them, and be patient unless they show no willingness to change



(More in-depth):

1. This person is acting in a manner that is unacceptable, and you do not wish to associate with them anymore. You cut them off because of this, but you do not harden your heart to them, in the hopes that they will learn the error of their ways.

2. This person is acting in a manner that is unacceptable, and you are significantly irritated, hurt/distressed, or endangered by this. You keep in contact, hoping they will change their ways.

3. This person is acting in a manner that is unacceptable, and you are at risk of being hurt or irritated by this. You try to patiently explain to them why they are wrong, but cut them off if they continue to remain the way they are.

(Of course, you can pick some combination of the above. These were just the three main ways I could think of to handle this.)

Also, feel free to explain your choice. :) (I'll probably get back to this, my brain is absolute putty bleh)

[Horatio Nelson]

Probably 3, although I am not keen on cutting people off.

I can't really imagine a circumstance where I had no other choice but to remove someone from my life. People usually aren't that unreasonable.

[Karkat]

Probably 3, although I am not keen on cutting people off.

I can't really imagine a circumstance where I had no other choice but to remove someone from my life. People usually aren't that unreasonable.

Well, for instance, imagine that you're minding your own business, living life peacefully, when you announce to a friend that you like steak. Your friend is a vegetarian. Your friend begins to say hurtful and hateful things every time food and you come up in conversation together, or even threatens to physically hurt you if you don't stop eating meat. What then? (Poor example, I know, but my brain is shot.)

I think 3 is honestly what I'd choose as well. I just have to put more thought into my explanation. :P

[Bleid]

This is a somewhat light debate, as I've actually been debating for a while now, and my brain (and my English) are suffering.

I'll pose a relatively simple question, and explain each (main) option.

When someone you care about is ignorant or prejudiced, is the best way to treat them to:

1. Cut them off, but accept them later if they have a change of heart

2. Keep them in (causing possible damage or irritation to yourself) and try to be patient with them

3. Try to explain to them, and be patient unless they show no willingness to change



(More in-depth):

1. This person is acting in a manner that is unacceptable, and you do not wish to associate with them anymore. You cut them off because of this, but you do not harden your heart to them, in the hopes that they will learn the error of their ways.

2. This person is acting in a manner that is unacceptable, and you are significantly irritated, hurt/distressed, or endangered by this. You keep in contact, hoping they will change their ways.

3. This person is acting in a manner that is unacceptable, and you are at risk of being hurt or irritated by this. You try to patiently explain to them why they are wrong, but cut them off if they continue to remain the way they are.

(Of course, you can pick some combination of the above. These were just the three main ways I could think of to handle this.)

Also, feel free to explain your choice. :) (I'll probably get back to this, my brain is absolute putty bleh)

The easiest and laziest way would be #1. I'd recommend that to most people.

#2 seems very similar to #1, but it threatens a sort of danger to the person involved, so I would stay away from that as much as possible.

#3 seems the best to me, if you only spend your time with reasonable, understandable people. I tend to only keep company of that sort, so I would use #3 most of the time.

However, if I was up against a family member that I don't really care for? Likely #1.

#2 feels to me to be a situation for the Vera House to help someone deal with, by its description. You might not have intended it to be so, though.

[Karkat]

#2 feels to me to be a situation for the Vera House to help someone deal with, by its description. You might not have intended it to be so, though.

No, actually, it was just (in more or less words) someone's stance on a specific topic that dealt with this type of decision. (Said conversation sparked the idea for this thread.) I'm actually not sure what you're talking about.

[Bleid]

No, actually, it was just (in more or less words) someone's stance on a specific topic that dealt with this type of decision. (Said conversation sparked the idea for this thread.) I'm actually not sure what you're talking about.

I was referring to the "endangerment" part of it.

[Karkat]

I was referring to the "endangerment" part of it.

I meant that I didn't know what Vera House was prior to this. I'm still a bit confused, but anyways, no- I was just thinking up theoretical scenarios. Didn't actually reference anything at the time, other than the conversation this thread was based off of.

[Typhlosion]

#2 or #3, depending on how much the person's a hard head.

I don't abandon people so easily.

[Karkat]

#2 or #3, depending on how much the person's a hard head.

I don't abandon people so easily.

Yeah, I'm not inclined to abandon people either. I'm actually horrendously passive, and people tend to take advantage of me because I don't put my foot down.

But I do have my limits, and I've been getting better about standing up for myself.

[Bleid]

I meant that I didn't know what Vera House was prior to this. I'm still a bit confused, but anyways, no- I was just thinking up theoretical scenarios. Didn't actually reference anything at the time, other than the conversation this thread was based off of.

Ah. Fair enough. I initially thought it was something like an abusive relationship you were mentioning there. I get'cha. :)

[Karkat]

Ah. Fair enough. I thought it was something like an abusive relationship you were mentioning there. :)

I guess it could be, but that wasn't necessarily my intent. Sorry for the misunderstanding. :)

[Miserabilia]

3; the least we could do is try to change they're ways and make them see that their stance is hurting people.
If you fail the best is to let them go, since it would show that they do not care enough about you to change their prejeduce.

[James Dean]

If I was real close with them, I would be more up front about it. Someone that I didn't really know, or don't want to know I would just ignore as I don't know them and what they say doesn't affect me. But it it's a friend, or someone who I'm attached with then I want to talk to them more about it. I would accept their opinion regardless.

[TheN3rdyOutcast]

Option 1: Unless said personis young, I don't have time to deal with ignorance. My shit's not in order, and I can't afford to have someone make it less orderly.

[Body odah Man]

Three

[Gigablue]

It depends on how well I know the person. If they're someone I just met, I'll probably cut them off. If I know them and know that they tend to be more reasonable, I'll put more effort into trying to educate them.

[Horatio Nelson]

Well, for instance, imagine that you're minding your own business, living life peacefully, when you announce to a friend that you like steak. Your friend is a vegetarian. Your friend begins to say hurtful and hateful things every time food and you come up in conversation together, or even threatens to physically hurt you if you don't stop eating meat. What then? (Poor example, I know, but my brain is shot.)

I think 3 is honestly what I'd choose as well. I just have to put more thought into my explanation. :P


That kind of stuff doesn't really bother me. I would probably tell them to deal with it or leave. Essentially number 3. But again, I have few people in my life that I'm close to, so I'd be surprised if I ever encountered this scenario.

[JamesSuperBoy]

It really all depends on the relationship - which I think here is not to great anyways or long established bit in any case option 1 for me - there are other friends/causes/activities and your own contentment / happiness to pursue in life -

[CosmicNoodle]

It depends, if I sat them down, tried to explain to them, and they refused to change there mind out of shear syupidity or ignorance, then, depending on how much they meant to me, I'd cut them off. BUT, so long as there ignorance to a specific thing or concept doesn'y constantly eat at me or annoy me, or come up often, then I'd likely stay around them, but to be honest, think less of them.

[Babs]

I would try to explain to them, but if they refuse to to even have a conversation about it then they're probably blatantly and willingly ignorant and I don't like those kind of people. I would cut them off if the beliefs they cling to are gross, bigoted ways of thinking.

[Karkat]

I would try to explain to them, but if they refuse to to even have a conversation about it then they're probably blatantly and willingly ignorant and I don't like those kind of people. I would cut them off if the beliefs they cling to are gross, bigoted ways of thinking.

The thing about most people who are like that, I've found, is that they're only like that because they don't know better than to be.

I mean, hell, you've got Nazis, members of the KKK, etc. who have turned a full 180 because something struck a cord in them. Arguably, until that point, they were grossly ignorant.

[Dying Ember]

I would try to be as patient as possible and try and make them understand but if they didn't accept it then I would jist ignore their opinion. I don't really cut people off.