mcjohnjohn

原帖由 Ultraman 於 2009-1-11 23:57 發表
Of course, even I say there is only a few Christians have these 8 things in the whole world, there must be "someone" coming up and deny it. And that "someone" is very likely a Christian but not non-believer. Why? Cuz only people in that particular group will defend. Just like your comment, you don't think there will be a Christian saying "no, Christians are not kind and mercy" but only non-believers will. This kind of saying other people are stereotyping all because of certain people don't want to face the truth, not because of whether the issue is stereotyping or not, which it is always an excuse.

I can claim that "not all Christians are kind and mercy", do I need to "defend" that? why?
Does a Christian need to defend other Christians even they are doing bad? For me, I don't think so law.

Seems that certain people don't want to face the truth...

mcjohnjohn

原帖由 Ultraman 於 2009-1-11 23:57 發表
How about I say "All cats like to eat fish" and "Most dogs will obey/listen to their owners"? Am I still stereotyping? Only because you people think those 8 things are not really existing at all. Or how about I say "1 out of 10 Christians have these 8 things" or "8 out of 10 Christians have these 8 things"? To you people, I'm still stereotyping, all because of you guys don't want to face the truth to non-believers' eyes.

... well, it seems that 1 out of 10 Ultraman enjoys stereotyping~

Ultraman

原帖由 Austin 於 2009-1-11 17:32 發表


Yes, that is still stereotyping.  My cats don't like to eat fish.  And I know many dogs don't obey to their owner.  So what make your opinion the "truth" and mine is not?

Look here, I am not denying those things and those Christians exist.  Of course they do, but to say most Christians are that way is irresponsible.  There are over 8 million Protestants in Canada alone, so how many you've come across to come to the conclusion that most Christians are how you described.

And let me make it clear to you, I'm not a Christian.  I'm just sick of those anti-christians finding any and every way to attack people.  Just like I'm sick of those anti-gay or racist attacks.

If you want to post your experience, that's fine, to stereotype a group of people is wrong.

This is kind of silly and childish argument.
For example, I say: "usually human have two eyes and one nose." And you say I'm stereotyping, cuz there are babies only have one eye and no  nose in born. OK, what is stereotyping, and what is a neutral comment? Please don't give rare and exceptional case, which make all comments become stereotyping.

If there is only 10 people in the world, and all of them like to eat fish (including myself). I say: "all the human in the world like to eat fish", am I stereotyping? If 9 out of 10 like to eat fish, and I say: "most human in the world like to eat fish", am I stereotyping? Do you know how many dogs are there in the world? You said you know many, how many? What is the portion? Bigger or smaller portion? How do you know my "most" is not the majority of them but your "many" is?

Once more, what is "stereotyping" and what is "general case"? How to describe general case but not count as stereotyping in your opinion? Or in your pov there should be no general case at all, only case by case?

Ultraman

原帖由 Austin 於 2009-1-11 17:53 發表


Because voters are probably voting based on their feeling of that group of people, not necessaily having ATTACK in mind.  

The funny thing is, if like some people believe, that LYK are mostly Christians, and if Christians can't accept "the truth", then how come the highest vote isn't "none of the above"?

How do we know every voter's religious background? A believer can vote none of the above, also all of the above; same as a non-believer. You can't assume all believers would defend and all non-believers would against, are you stereotyping too?
You may think: "because numbers of non-believer voters are way more than believer voters, and that's why the voting result is like this". Well, who knows?! People who don't want to accept and face the result could have many different excuse.

kisstherain

People stereotype because they are lazy to find out the truth.
They will 'remember' when they see people from a certain group  doing things that fit their assumption. They tend to forget or ignore when people from certain group doing something not fitting their assumption. A lot of people  goes "See, it's a Richmond c 9 driving again" when they see a Chinese woman not driving so well in Richmond. But do they say anything or even notice  women drive alright in Richmond?

mcjohnjohn

原帖由 Ultraman 於 2009-1-12 14:00 發表

This is kind of silly and childish argument.
For example, I say: "usually human have two eyes and one nose." And you say I'm stereotyping, cuz there are babies only have one eye and no  nose in born. ...

大家真係仲未發現其實一切既謎一早已經解開左喇咩?
登登登登~ 等我金田莊莊同大家解釋一下啦!
各人所認識既基督徒, 試問點會係同一班呢? 有人遇著一班冇咁好既, 就當然覺得基督徒唔係好野. 有人遇著一班好既, 就會覺得基督徒係好野啦~
睇投票既數據, 就知道LYK既voter遇到差既基督徒既機會係大過遇著好既基督徒!

呢個小弟十分同意, 因為小弟都係一個差既基督徒, 有好多地方要改善呀~ 不過, 包唔包括呢八點就見仁見智啦~

Ultraman

原帖由 kisstherain 於 2009-1-11 22:22 發表
People stereotype because they are lazy to find out the truth.
They will 'remember' when they see people from a certain group  doing things that fit their assumption. They tend to forget or ignore when people from certain group doing something not fitting their assumption. A lot of people  goes "See, it's a Richmond c 9 driving again" when they see a Chinese woman not driving so well in Richmond. But do they say anything or even notice  women drive alright in Richmond?

You better watch out for your own words. Or someone will come up and whine, say you're now stereotyping people who stereotype are all lazy people.

Ultraman

原帖由 mcjohnjohn 於 2009-1-11 22:40 發表


睇投票既數據, 就知道LYK既voter遇到差既基督徒既機會係大過遇著好既基督徒!

Same to you, mjj. You're now stereotyping the possibility of how this result came out.

Ultraman

My knowledge and understanding of the meaning of the use of some adjectives are as below:

- almost all
example: There are 10 apples on my table, 9 in red, and 1 in green.
I would say "Almost all the apples on my table are in red".
Question: Am I stereotyping?

- most
example: There are 10 apples on my table, 6 in red, and 4 in green.
I would say "Most apples on my table are in red".
Question: Am I stereotyping?


My big question:
Why there are troublesome people who like to make things more complicated, and even worse, turn nothing to a problem, and enlarge a small problem to a big one?
(Note: I only use "there are", but not "almost all", not "most", not even "some" this time, in case someone say I'm stereotyping again.)

mcjohnjohn

原帖由 Ultraman 於 2009-1-12 15:07 發表

Same to you, mjj. You're now stereotyping the possibility of how this result came out.

Ultraman兄, 可否詳細解釋一下小弟o係邊一個層面有stereotype?