Laurie (feenoholic) wrote in find_justice,
Laurie
feenoholic
find_justice

  • Mood:
  • Music:

Question for the general public...

Does who is saying a statemnet affect what is said?

I personally think that we should listen to what is said over who says it, but i find it hard to take that judgment of who a person is away from what is said. If that wasn't confusing enough.. :-P
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic
  • 11 comments
I think the substance of the statement is what is truly important, but the speaker can contribute or take away from the statement depending on how the listener choses. I mean in some sense we teach everything to ourselves because we decide whether or not to believe what is told.
i like it... the whole teaching ourselves thing.. but how about for young children.. they just soak up everything and very influential, do you think they really choose most of the informantion that they think is true?
good point with the little kids. i guess before their morale is soured or let down they WILL believe everything.
not always, I tried teaching my 6year old that black was white, and she would not have any of it :S
I guess you have to bring into consideration your perspective of the person. Classic example- George W.
Some people agree with what he says and others wonder if he's had a frontal lobotomy. Hell, I think he's a robot who has a virus eating up his memory and crashing his hard drive, but that's just me. No matter how you look at it, you're either supporting him or not supporting him.
it's not just you. believe me. :D
Hi, I'm new... and by the looks of things so is this community! Hope it will be successful.

Does 'who is saying a statement affect what is said?' I tend to think so. After all, if two people were to say the same thing then aren't we inclined to (more willingly) accept the words of the one we respect over the one we don't?

In general: I feel it is wiser to listen to what is being said over who is saying it. Some people have great ideas but are poor communicators. In the same way that some people may successfully promote abhorrent ideas due to being excellent orators.

It is sensible, then, to keep this in mind when listening to a speaker whom you feel is convincing - whom you feel can persuade you. It cannot be ruled out that such speakers may have an ulterior (and perhaps harmful) motive for what they are saying.

In any case, knowing the reason 'why' a person says what they say is perhaps as important as what it is they are actually saying.


I hope I have said something that made sense!
yes it made sense ^_^

good sense, i can agree with a statement whole heartedly only to have it tarnished by someone saying it for the wrong reasons.

integrity is important and i always wonder why people say what they say.
i think if everyone could lay out what they meant by something before they said it, they might realize they didn't always want to say it.
The biggest difference between the "haves" and the "have-nots" is their choice in mentors.

Often, when I show a liberal how to make money and become more succesful financially, they say, "If money makes you happy, and that's your thing, more power to you. Me, personaly, I don't need that type of capitalist/things-orientededness as you do...". But then, as soon as they have a political candidate talking about fiscal matters, they are right there like GLUE, holding banners, saying "YES, something needs to be done to help people financially..."

Ken D
http://kensworld.livejournal.com
Hmmm sorry for jumping in late but I'm new here.

If you simply turn anything a politician says into a double negative, then believe what you turn his words into then you will generaly be on the right track.

never believe government stats, if they tell you they have cut crime or unemployment, generaly they are lying, normaly they have simply changed the criterea for the figures to be classed as unemployed, or as a crime. hell here they go one better, simply don't respond to emergency calls within 2 hours the people no longer report the crimes and if people are going to be that apathetic fewer will be reported, so obviously there could not have been committed eh?