Did Wade just shut down mentally?

[_Tal Bachman]

I don't really get something - Wade and I were interviewing each other; both threads seemed (to me anyway) to come to a point where the untenable and heretical nature of his comments became blatant; and then...nothing. He never posts again on them. There's no explanation, no concession, no nothing.

What I'm wondering about is if this is the kind of psychological shutting down I've seen before, where it's literally like the guy all of a sudden just goes "ZZZzzrrrrrp", and then goes "off".

If so, I don't know whether that's interesting, or sad, or both. Wade, if you're reading this, is that really what it comes to? Why didn't you answer my simple little questions about the shape of the earth and the sum of two and two?

[_OUT OF MY MISERY]

Wade and Gazzy boy have both been committed they are sharing the same room....

I think they have had their computers taken away.....having to constantly defend crap can make you crazy...which what I think may have happened.....or they are trying some different medications on them and are giving them time to work

[_christopher]

I don't really get something - Wade and I were interviewing each other; both threads seemed (to me anyway) to come to a point where the untenable and heretical nature of his comments became blatant; and then...nothing. He never posts again on them. There's no explanation, no concession, no nothing.

People like him will shut down when they cannot control the direction of the conversation. It's all about him, his mirror, his keen intellect, and telling others their problems. Just remember, at the end of the day Tracy still loves you....he has nobody like that. Wonder why?


Chris <><

[_beastie]

Here’s my psychobabble for the day –

When people have significant emotional investments in maintaining a certain belief, their brains will often “help” them maintain this belief despite contradictory evidence by literally erasing, minimizing, or distorting threatening information, so the belief system can proceed unimpeded. I believe this is what truly separates True Believers (not in the casual sense of the term) from people trying to sort things out and seeking more information. True Believers, although they don’t realize it themselves, are not allowing contradictory information to be fully processed.

From my experience, it seems to me that True Believers often carry a heftier emotional investment paradigm than others. Just a couple of examples from people I know: (caution: of course I can’t read the minds of any of these individuals, this is just speculation based on observation)

1) Death – While losing any loved one is traumatic, there are some deaths that are even more so due to their sudden, or untimely, fashion. I can’t imagine, for example, losing a child. I do not know how people deal with that sort of trauma and remain sane. One person I know can only deal with this loss through the belief that they will be reunited one day. The loss of the belief system that allows that equilibrium to be maintained is too threatening to the psyche. Belief must continue for the individual to remain sane and function, so their brains “protect” the individual from truly having to confront threatening information. I’m not criticizing this because I really don’t know how people survive the death of a child. If it happened to me, I have no idea what sort of processing would enable me to continue functioning in any sort of meaningful way.

2) Traumatic Life Event – One female believer I know quite well was molested by her father throughout her childhood. Her father started molesting her at such a young age she has no memory of “pre-molestation”. He stopped when she reached puberty. Her father, and her entire family, were super active uber believers, and still are (with the exception of one child who left the church as an adult). The molestation was revealed when all the children were already adults. It obviously caused trauma to the rest of the family. The mother had a troubled relationship with the daughter anyway, and the mother seemed to partially blame the daughter. The only way the daughter has been able to process all of this and retain familial relationships, which she desperately wants, is to focus on the teachings of repentance and forgiveness. People can truly repent and change, and others are morally required to forgive. Were she to lose faith in the church, this fragile construction would likely fall apart immediately, which is threatening to her psyche. Again, I’m not being critical or superior, because I have no idea what I would do or believe to cope with such a trauma.

3) Abandonment of Core for Belief – I know a couple of people who fall into this scenario. Sometimes belief in the LDS church requires an immense sacrifice of something that could be called “core” to the individual’s self. One example is sexual orientation. Someone who is, by nature, homosexual, yet believes in the LDS church, may sacrifice the idea or hope of ever having a truly fulfilling intimate relationship (either by remaining asexual or engaging in heterosexual relationships not out of natural desire, but obligation). As time goes on, alternative choices seem to disappear altogether. The script is written. A tremendous sacrifice has been made, the nature of which most of us will never fully understand or appreciate. If one were to lose faith in the very belief system that necessitated this sacrifice, then the sacrifice would seem meaningless and cruel, particularly if so much time has passed that it is no longer realistic to imagine living any other way. The belief system must be maintained so the sacrifice always seems meaningful and just.

Obviously, there are other factors, these are just some I’ve observed personally. I think when people seem to “shut down” as you suggest Wade has done, it is possibly that the individual is a True Believer whose brain will simply not “allow” them to process information that, if actually processed, could present a serious challenge to the maintenance of faith.

One of the stranger things about so-called debating or dialoguing with believers over a period of several years is that you notice how certain information gets erased. I’ve seen certain believers repeat the same claims, over and over, even when those same claims were repeatedly debunked. (I know Randy J on RFM is very familiar with this phenomenon as well). I don’t believe these people are engaging in this behavior deliberately, and, in fact, may actually believe the OTHER is the one engaging in the behavior. Nor do I believe, most of the time, deliberate deception is taking place. It’s just an extreme form of confirmation bias.

http://skepdic.com/confirmbias.html

Confirmation bias refers to a type of selective thinking whereby one tends to notice and to look for what confirms one's beliefs, and to ignore, not look for, or undervalue the relevance of what contradicts one's beliefs.

This tendency to give more attention and weight to data that support our beliefs than we do to contrary data is especially pernicious when our beliefs are little more than prejudices. If our beliefs are firmly established on solid evidence and valid confirmatory experiments, the tendency to give more attention and weight to data that fit with our beliefs should not lead us astray as a rule. Of course, if we become blinded to evidence truly refuting a favored hypothesis, we have crossed the line from reasonableness to closed-mindedness.

I don’t know Wade in “real life”, so can’t make any sort of reliable assessment in regards to whether or not this is taking place with him. All I can say is that it looks that way to me.

[_truth dancer]

Hi Beastie,

As we have discussed before, the neurology to belief is fascinating!

The dynamics of confirmation bias appear a result of hardwiring that is powerful; an evolutionary development which has made humankind have the ability to function.

Over the last few years I have become obsessed with tying to understand why some let go of belief and others do not, or, why some folks have a hardwiring that seems impossible to alter and other can although it may be difficult.

At this point I think the reasons are many; the need for a belief is certainly a factor. support or acceptance of non-belief, fear, willingness to grow and change, level of sacrifice for one's belief, etc. etc. etc. all play into it.

But as you mentioned, I truly believe some people literally (neurologically) cannot let go of their belief or unwire the hardwiring that has taken place... at least the pain of it is too great to contemplate.

I'm not suggesting any way of managing life is better than another. I believe the brain protects us ... at times reality may be too difficult to face; our beliefs (true or not) can help one manage life.

~dancer~

[_wenglund]

I don't really get something - Wade and I were interviewing each other; both threads seemed (to me anyway) to come to a point where the untenable and heretical nature of his comments became blatant; and then...nothing. He never posts again on them. There's no explanation, no concession, no nothing.

What I'm wondering about is if this is the kind of psychological shutting down I've seen before, where it's literally like the guy all of a sudden just goes "ZZZzzrrrrrp", and then goes "off".

If so, I don't know whether that's interesting, or sad, or both. Wade, if you're reading this, is that really what it comes to? Why didn't you answer my simple little questions about the shape of the earth and the sum of two and two?

For those who seem to need a delusionally self-aggrandizing explanation for why people may discontinue conversing with them on a given subject, I suppose the explanation in the title of this thread is as good as any.

However, for those who have a grip on reality, above average comprehension ablitily, more than a Googlized familiarity with a broad range of philosophical principles, and were privy to our conversation as well as my explanation for where I had been for a week and what I had been doing and why (see the thread: "I had a great week"), may rightly suppose that the conversation ended because I had more valuable and uplifting things to do, and the conversation wasn't resumed because you weren't sufficiently grasping what I was saying, and consequently kept repeating yourself and taking the discussion in seemingly endless circles. In other words, the discussion ended because I didn't want to waste any more time in fruitless exchanges with you on the topic under discussion.

Now, if you wish to somehow demonstrate that you do get the jist of what I was saying, that then may give reasonable cause to continue.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Mister Scratch]

For those who seem to need a delusionally self-aggrandizing explanation for why people may discontinue conversing with them on a given subject, I suppose the explanation in the title of this thread is as good as any.

However, for those who have a grip on reality, above average comprehension ablitily, more than a Googlized familiarity with a broad range of philosophical principles, and were privy to our conversation as well as my explanation for where I had been for a week and what I had been doing and why (see the thread: "I had a great week"), may rightly suppose that the conversation ended because I had more valuable and uplifting things to do, and the conversation wasn't resumed because you weren't sufficiently grasping what I was saying, and consequently kept repeating yourself and taking the discussion in seemingly endless circles. In other words, the discussion ended because I didn't want to waste any more time in fruitless exchanges with you on the topic under discussion.

Now, if you wish to somehow demonstrate that you do get the jist of what I was saying, that then may give reasonable cause to continue.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I have seen you bail out of multiple discussions with multiple people, Wade. Why is it that it's always *you* who's doing the bailing out? Could it be that you're suffering from a cognitive distortion when you try and claim that people "don't sufficiently grasp" what you're saying?

[_wenglund]

I have seen you bail out of multiple discussions with multiple people, Wade. Why is it that it's always *you* who's doing the bailing out? Could it be that you're suffering from a cognitive distortion when you try and claim that people "don't sufficiently grasp" what you're saying?

I am disinclined to "bail out" of conversations with people who I see as willing and able to discuss valuable things in a reasonable, informed, and rational way, because it is such a rare occurance (particularly at online discussion boards like this) and I find myself on those rare occasions being enriched and enlightened and uplifted. This is particularly true with reasonable, informed, and rational people I disagree with. Such conversations are not ended by "bailing out" on one or both sides, but by coming to a mutual understanding, if not mutual agreement.

However, I have learned over the years, and most recently in particular, that when I determine that the other party is being sufficiently unreasonable and irrational and closed-minded (and it takes quite a bit to convince me of that--hope springs eternal), it is in both parties interest for me to discontinue such conterproductive interactions and thus avoid wasting any more time and energy.

Granted, those who I may view as unreasonable and irrational and closed-minded will likely view me as the unreasonable and irrational and closed-minded one. And, I am fine with that. Besides, it is not as if there is sufficient reasonableness and rationalness and open-mindedness to enable a change of minds in that regard. So, that is that, and to each their own.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Mercury]

[/quote]

For those who seem to need a delusionally self-aggrandizing explanation for why people may discontinue conversing with them on a given subject...

OK, wade. Out here in the "realm of the stupid" we call these things reasons. Also see: Reasoning.

...resolutions , I suppose the explanation in the title of this thread is as good as any.

Well did you?!

I don't think you saw it that way. You would have cognitively observed it as an extreme distaste for posting to the aforementioned thread.

However, for those who have a grip on reality,

OMG you did NOT just say that.

above average comprehension ablitily, more than a Googlized familiarity with a broad range of philosophical principles,

So one must be posessing higher intelligence than most in order to agree with...you. Hmm, Wade, do you work in a movie theater because your one hell of a projectionist.

and were privy to our conversation as well as my explanation for where I had been for a week and what I had been doing

Did Dr wazoo give you pills for the voices?

may rightly suppose that the conversation ended because I had more valuable and uplifting things to do, and the conversation wasn't resumed because you weren't sufficiently grasping what I was saying,

Ahh...and now we see the reasoning your mind was feeding you for disconnecting and eventual shutdown. isn't rationalization GREAT wade?

and consequently kept repeating yourself and taking the discussion in seemingly endless circles. In other words, the discussion ended because I didn't want to waste any more time in fruitless exchanges with you on the topic under discussion.

Why? Because it would be a waste of time to explain your crackpot theories and excuses?

Now, if you wish to somehow demonstrate that you do get the jist of what I was saying, that then may give reasonable cause to continue.

Thanks, -a tool-

You want back in control SO BAD! don't you?

[_beastie]

Hmm, Wade, do you work in a movie theater because your one hell of a projectionist.

Heh. Now that's good.