Limiting debates

[Guest [Lo...]]

I found this quote a good while ago and have been occasionally thinking about it, trying to make some sense of it and look out for it:

 

"The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there's free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate." - Noam Chomsky

 

 

What do you think about that, do you ever see it happening in your life?

 

 

Lost

[[lo...]]

Hi Lost

 

The quote suggests that someone somewhere is keeping us confined in some way.  I have been thinking lately that the only real limit to our thinking is our own lack of imagination. We do a pretty good job of confining ourselves.  Our own need for social approval is stronger than any externally imposed restrictions.

 

Cog fog also makes it difficult to think clearly about anything remotely complex.  :'(  I really miss that.

 

LF 

[[VC...]]

Nice thread, Lost - thanks for making my wheels go 'round early this morning. 

 

I observed this type of thing happening in certain religious circles that I eventually left due to people being ostracized for raising opposing thoughts, questioning the leaders, or exercising personal freedoms that were frowned upon because it didn't fit the "parameters." Maybe that's a different case scenario but it crosses my mind when I read your quote. Of course, when something like this happens, there's no real freedom - just an  illusion of such. It happens on forums like this, in politics, and elsewhere in life. So people debate within limits, thinking they're enjoying a freedom, when they're being controlled. To venture beyond the limits of a controlled debate means we're eventually ostracized or given the boot. I don't know if I'm even on the same train of thought with you about this, but these thoughts do hit my benzo brain.

 

Lookingforward raised an interesting point when she said "our own need for social approval is stronger than any externally imposed restrictions." This is true as well. If we're stuck within the confines of a certain spectrum of acceptable opinion, desiring acceptance within that group means we readily adapt to the herd mentality of that group. It's like subtle brainwashing. Anyone who actually exercises critical thinking beyond the parameters of acceptable debate is quickly labeled maverick, outcast, heretic, or worse. 

 

Now that just hurt my brain to write. 

V 

[[lo...]]

Hi folks

 

V - sorry your brain hurts. I know the feeling.  :'(

 

We are 2 days away from our Independence Referendum in Scotland.

 

Whatever the result it has certainly captured the political imagination of the people and the vote is likely to be very close.

 

Sadly though it is causing divisions, ill feelings etc among friends and family members.

 

Debate cannot be held in isolation from other aspects of life. It is inevitable that extreme or unusual opinions will be met with rejection. The human instinct is to maintain equilibrium otherwise society could not function.  A certain amount of dissension is good but too much is often a catalyst for change. This may be positive or negative.

 

Keeping debate within acceptable limits aids survival of a social group such as a forum. Without it, the forum would become more volatile. We don't need that in BB.  Some pushing of the limits is healthy but when it goes too far it becomes damaging.

 

Gosh, have run out of steam now ..........

 

LF 

 

 

 

 

[[Co...]]

Hi,

 

I'm not sure if LAS is meaning to refer to BB in some way, but since some of the replies referenced BB, I guess this thought has occurred to others too.

 

@VCharis As you indicate, every forum is going to limit content in some way or another. What I can tell you is that what I concentrate on is codifying writing style and behaviour, and leave (as much as possible) decisions about content to members. Unusually for forum such as this, there is no requirement for members to be actively seeking to quit benzodiazepines. Though, since we are about helping people seeking support with withdrawal from this class of drug, we do not allow content which actively 'promotes' benzodiazepines; this would be contrary to our mission statement. Nor do we allow content which actively promotes behaviour which might lead to new addictions/dependencies (I am not talking about the legitimate use of medicines to treat diseases). So, yes, there are some sensible, practical limits upon what might be discussed at BB, but I try to keep it to the minimum.

 

What you will find is that when there is a complaint from a member about being 'restricted' at BB in some way, the complaint will almost invariably be about limits on behaviour or writing style. Members can write about nearly anything they wish at BB, but they cannot write 'prescriptively'. They can joke around and engage in banter, but they cannot write abusively towards others.

 

I am reminded of another thread:

 

http://www.benzobuddies.org/forum/index.php?topic=48083.0

 

Different subject, but it (seemingly like this thread) questioned the very nature and possible downsides of a place like this. As far as I'm concerned, these are valid and interesting topics for discussion.

[[VC...]]

Hi Colin,

 

Thanks for your input. As I brainstormed LostAtSea's quote, I jumped in mainly to share what I've observed with politics & religion, not so much the forum. Naturally, with this type of forum some limitations are warranted for the safety and wellbeing of its members. Agreed and appreciated. We're not a debate forum, after all, and too many times online interactions can easily flare between certain temperaments and personalities. Part of life. As Lookingforward shared, this kind of forum would become volatile without sensible guidelines in place. But I didn't think the quote was about BBs.

 

I thought the quote pertained to limiting debate in general. I'll go read the link you provided.

 

Thanks, Colin.

 

VCharis