Is it OK to forswear family and friends for political beliefs?

Seems to be a popular topic.

My grandfather lived in Nazi Austria, and built up a resistance force there. That meant he had to forswear a LOT of family and friends.

I am pretty sure not many would argue he did wrong, but yet I see members ridiculing the same thing, but from different perspectives. But let's face it, we have to start the debate with: There ARE political factors that calls for forswearing.

IF you have a grasp of the world that makes you think life is a divine thing (and what a beautiful thought that is!), then why would you NOT forswear someone arguing for mass-extinction?

Given the amount of focus this has had, I thought this might be an apt topic start.

@Gelatinous Cube: What if they voted for Hitler, or worse, Obama? ~;)

I start to regret doing Goodwin in OP... Can we keep the thread somewhat balanced?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

Well, I got unfriended for voting for Obama, which amuses me. Obama is a far, far, far-right Democrat. He's not an extreme candidate, and his party is not an extreme party.

Hitler, on the other hand, was clearly a threat to everyone's health long before he actually got into power. Interestingly, the tactics he used to get elected in terms of campaigning and making promises are pretty similar to a certain group of American idealogues... :creep:

---

Well, forgetting your blindness and hypocrisy ~;), I think you missed the point that my post was a humorous and not horribly serious way to ask you if there were exceptions to what you said about not forswearing people because of who they voted for.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

Well, I got unfriended for voting for Obama, which amuses me. Obama is a far, far, far-right Democrat. He's not an extreme candidate, and his party is not an extreme party.

Hitler, on the other hand, was clearly a threat to everyone's health long before he actually got into power. Interestingly, the tactics he used to get elected in terms of campaigning and making promises are pretty similar to a certain group of American idealogues... :creep:

---

Like having thugs posted outside polling stations?
Like cheating, lying, and trying to make disagreeing with you a crime? That is actually Obama and the Demzis.

The Black Panthers being 'observers', Obama supporters chasing Republican observers out with guns, etc, etc. Man, you live in a bubble.

Vuk, may I say that I object to your:

Everything you need to know about Kadagar_AV:
Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV
In a racial conflict I'd have no problem popping off some negroes.

The quote is indeed true, but VERY much taken out of context. Specially by the way you highlight it.

If I remember correctly, what followed before that was: In a war between aliens and humans I would go berserk on the aliens... or something along those lines... Then that quote followed... ... then the rest followed.

The discussion at hand was at what level you would fight. And YES, if there was an ALL OUT GLOBAL RACIAL CONFLICT... I wouldn't mind popping off some Negroes. I do however deem the chance of that ever happening to next to nil. Remember that this was the next link in the chain from alien invasions. Why would anyone NOT defend their race in an all out global conflict?

You make it sound like I in a bar fight would jump in on the white guys side. Or even worse, shoot the black guy for joy.

It frankly disgusts me that you use the quote like that.

You are of course entitled to, it is an actual quote of mine and I stand by it still. Most people on these boards, I sincerely hope, know that it is taken wildly out of context though. But remember that we do have new members, and stuff like that might alienate them from visiting these boards, and this sub forum in particular.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

Please back that hogwash up with sources that don't come from Fox News or the conservative blogosphere.

But more to the point, if you think black people being observers automatically makes them 'thugs' then you have your own issues. The Black Panthers stopped being a violent group decades ago.

---

So you will except a source from anyone except those who actually care enough and are honest enough to tell you? Well, in that case...


It is not that they are black. There are plenty of black vote observers on the Republican and Democratic side. It is that they are a fanatical, militant, wanna-be terrorist group.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9HdvBb8HBk
Yes, I can see why you say they are so peaceful! Inciting genocide is usually considered peaceful.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3F3iUk1RrQ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

LOL did you just try to say Fox News is more credible than other news sources?

---

No, I didn't, but it is better than most.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vuk

No, I didn't, but it is better than most.

---

Actually, keep my quote... The fact that you oppose me seem rather brilliant at the moment.

There is a difference here based on political factors.

What's described in the OP is of course nothing anyone(sane) sees as wrong. Goes for most opposition to dictatorships. The kind described by Lemur in the Obama thread, however, is clearly on the whacky side of the spectrum. That's a clear sign of fanaticism and cult-mentality.

Might surprise you but most of my friends are lefties and import, we don't discuss politics all that much and yes that includes muslims before you ask. We just have fun, they know I disagree with them that's enough.

@Vuk, as per usual, is a cascading fountain of sparkling disinformation. The video of scary black people he posts is from 2008. When Fox tried a repeat this year, all they could find was a single scary black man who was ... opening doors for old people. EVIL NEGRO INTIMIDATION!

As for the OP, I'd say it's a thing not to be done lightly, and dependent on judgment. If my close friends and/or family were supporting a cause or politico who was a clear and present danger, sure, I'd lay into them. But (a) even the most horrifying monsters of history usually had some sort of excuse or rationale to give a figleaf of justification to their crimes. The Khmer Rouge, Mao, Hitler, Vlad Tepes, take any one of them. All had their rationales. All had well-meaning people who helped them. If we refuse to engage, how do we persuade, and possibly peel away supporters?

(b) I'm not clear on how cutting someone completely out of your life is a convincing argument. My uncle, for example, is a Fox News Republican. He lectures me about how Wisconsin is a "socialist state," how liberals hate America, and when he's had enough gin he'll go off about how America should be split in two so "conservatives won't have to live with people who aren't real Americans."

Not clear how cutting him off would be helpful. I'd much rather be in his presence, calm and reasonable, and let the rest of my family observe the difference between us.

Anyway, what the current crazyfest reveals is that a measurable fraction of the right in America has convinced themselves that Obama is the Antichrist. The dangers of this sort of self-delusion should be evident. Just look at Vuk.

Meanwhile, some on the right continue to engage in a full-throated mental meltdown, such as this. (Warning: Profanity and hilarity.)

Sounds like this friends and family don't simply have the beliefs, they are being obnoxious with sharing them? It'd be reasonable to inform them you'd rather not hear that talk anymore. If they continue then certainly, ignoring them would be justified. But simply to have happenstance knowledge of their beliefs and completely forswear them on this basis would be shallow behavior itself. Quite a few acquaintences, some friends, and a few family frequently talk racist trash. It's easily enough ignored. But I have yet to see any of them demonstrate discriminatory behavior. That would be a different thing altogether. Belief does not equal behavior. Don't let their beliefs alter your behavior.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

Vuk, may I say that I object to your:

Everything you need to know about Kadagar_AV:
Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV
In a racial conflict I'd have no problem popping off some negroes.

The quote is indeed true, but VERY much taken out of context. Specially by the way you highlight it.

If I remember correctly, what followed before that was: In a war between aliens and humans I would go berserk on the aliens... or something along those lines... Then that quote followed... ... then the rest followed.

The discussion at hand was at what level you would fight. And YES, if there was an ALL OUT GLOBAL RACIAL CONFLICT... I wouldn't mind popping off some Negroes. I do however deem the chance of that ever happening to next to nil. Remember that this was the next link in the chain from alien invasions. Why would anyone NOT defend their race in an all out global conflict?

You make it sound like I in a bar fight would jump in on the white guys side. Or even worse, shoot the black guy for joy.

It frankly disgusts me that you use the quote like that.

You are of course entitled to, it is an actual quote of mine and I stand by it still. Most people on these boards, I sincerely hope, know that it is taken wildly out of context though. But remember that we do have new members, and stuff like that might alienate them from visiting these boards, and this sub forum in particular.

---

You object to me showing it, yet you stand by it? Tell me more about how not-crazy you are.
Sorry Kadagar, but it is not taken out of context. Something like that, in any context except a joke (which you admit it was not) is racist and crazy. True, it could be more so in one context than another, but the fact that you would say something like that not as a joke says enough already.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

@Vuk, as per usual, is a cascading fountain of sparkling disinformation. The video of scary black people he posts is from 2008. When Fox tried a repeat this year, all they could find was a single scary black man who was ... opening doors for old people. EVIL NEGRO INTIMIDATION!

As for the OP, I'd say it's a thing not to be done lightly, and dependent on judgment. If my close friends and/or family were supporting a cause or politico who was a clear and present danger, sure, I'd lay into them. But (a) even the most horrifying monsters of history usually had some sort of excuse or rationale to give a figleaf of justification to their crimes. The Khmer Rouge, Mao, Hitler, Vlad Tepes, take any one of them. All had their rationales. All had well-meaning people who helped them. If we refuse to engage, how do we persuade, and possibly peel away supporters?

(b) I'm not clear on how cutting someone completely out of your life is a convincing argument. My uncle, for example, is a Fox News Republican. He lectures me about how Wisconsin is a "socialist state," how liberals hate America, and when he's had enough gin he'll go off about how America should be split in two so "conservatives won't have to live with people who aren't real Americans."

Not clear how cutting him off would be helpful. I'd much rather be in his presence, calm and reasonable, and let the rest of my family observe the difference between us.

Anyway, what the current crazyfest reveals is that a measurable fraction of the right in America has convinced themselves that Obama is the Antichrist. The dangers of this sort of self-delusion should be evident. Just look at Vuk.

Meanwhile, some on the right continue to engage in a full-throated mental meltdown, such as this. (Warning: Profanity and hilarity.)

---

Scary black people? Evil negro? Damn, I love how the left likes to play the races card. You cannot object to the left threatening people without hating blacks. I don't give a rat's ass if it is a white loony like Bill Ayers or a black loony like that guy. What I care about is the intimidation and threats, so drop your whiny race baiting.
Second of all, only one of the vids is from 2008, and the other from 2012. It doesn't matter when the videos were shot though, because I posted them to demonstrate that they ARE a violent organization when a poster was saying that they were not. Everyone knows that. Just seeing them out there in combat dress is gonna intimidate people.

You are forgetting something else, those dictators are only seen as evil monsters in hindsight. They usually are seen as 'the light and the way' (sound familiar) when they get power, and anyone who opposes them is considered radical, dangerous, and crazy (sound familiar).

Also, I never advocated cutting off contact with Obama supporters. I asked a poster a theoretical question because I doubted her thought out his statement fully, and made a humorous jab at Obama comparing him to Hitler.
I have friends and family members who vote for Obama. I think their action will destroy the country, but I don't hate them or cut off contact with them because I don't think they have bad intentions. If they start reporting me to Obama's real committee of disinformation or still support him if he starts sending people to re-education camps (and it wouldn't surprise me if he did), then yeah, I'd break off contact with them.

You know, Vuk, if you're going to do the classic "I'm going to make a bunch of racial references and then scream 'race card' the moment anyone calls me on it"? You need to do it more artfully. It's a legitimate bit of doublethink, but it needs more finesse than you're bringing to the party.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vuk

Like having thugs posted outside polling stations?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vuk

The Black Panthers being 'observers', Obama supporters chasing Republican observers out with guns, etc, etc.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vuk

It is not that they are black. [...] It is that they are a fanatical, militant, wanna-be terrorist group.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vuk

Damn, I love how the left likes to play the races card.

---

Vuk, in case of an all out age conflict I wouldn't mind popping off some babies.

Now, do you think that means I consider the scenario likely, and do you think I promote or believe in the killing of infants?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

You know, Vuk, if you're going to do the classic "I'm going to make a bunch of racial references and then scream 'race card' the moment anyone calls me on it"? You need to do it more artfully. It's a legitimate bit of doublethink, but it needs more finesse than you're bringing to the party.

---

So what are you saying Lemur, that 'thug' means black? I think that says a lot about you.
And what, because I point out that a liberal group was using voter intimidation and they happen to be black, I am suddenly being racist? So make up your mind! Are black people off limit to criticism based on their actions, or all they all thugs?! You seem a bit confused there Lemur. (and equally paranoid)

EDIT: I think you watch too much Chris Matthews Lemmys. Neither Thug nor Foodstamps are racial references, and if you think so, then it says a lot more about your racist attitudes than about anyone else.

Like I said, you need more finesse to pull the maneuver you are attempting. As you continue to demonstrate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

Like I said, you need more finesse to pull the maneuver you are attempting. As you continue to demonstrate.

---

Maneuver? Ah, my little dishonest friend cannot help but to think in terms of rhetoric, lying, and persuasion.

It may be hard for you to understand Lemmy, being the type of 'man' that you are, but I am a lot less complex person than that. I just say the truth when I see, as I see it. No con-games and rhetorical maneuvers. I leave such slight-of-tongue up to you and your liberal colleagues. I rely on the truth, not rhetoric.

Well, if you are unable to recognize your own rhetorical maneuver as such, then it's no surprise you are so ineffective at deploying it.

Hint: When repeating things you heard on Fox News or talk radio, you are, in fact, regurgitating specific talking points and rhetoric.

Also, when putting my manhood in quotes, please use double, not single quotes. You wouldn't want people to think you are a God-hating Socialist European.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

Well, if you are unable to recognize your own rhetorical maneuver as such, then it's no surprise you are so ineffective at deploying it.

Hint: When repeating things you heard on Fox News or talk radio, you are, in fact, regurgitating specific talking points and rhetoric.
Also, when putting my manhood in quotes, please use double, not single quotes. You wouldn't want people to think you are a God-hating Socialist European.

---

That would be a good trick considering I don't have a TV that gets any reception and don't listen to the radio! I get all my information online, and most of it from Yahoo News which is extremely Left leaning.
Trust me dude, I don't want to go anywhere near your 'manhood'.

Wow, you really present yourself as someone unable to absorb the simplest fact. Single versus double quotes. You're using the European version, commie.

Why do you hate American grammar and punctuation?

I can't speak for the rest of Europe, but in Norway, we use «these quotes». Trying to put the blame on us for single quotes must be a dirty trick.

By the way, is it OK to forswear grammar and punctuation for political beliefs?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Viking

By the way, is it OK to forswear grammar and punctuation for political beliefs?

---

Never. NEVER.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Viking

By the way, is it OK to forswear grammar and punctuation for political beliefs?

---

No. Even the Nazi's were punctual (see "Hitler and trains"). :inquisitive:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

Wow, you really present yourself as someone unable to absorb the simplest fact. Single versus double quotes. You're using the European version, commie.

Why do you hate American grammar and punctuation?

---

Spank me daddy.

Hell no. As I have told Mrs. Lemur, good girls get spanked; bad girls get ignored.

Revise text as necessary to apply to this situation—not suggesting you are anything but a hot-blooded American male with ripped abs and glistening pecs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gregoshi

No. Even the Nazi's were punctual (see "Hitler and trains"). :inquisitive:

---

Damn... There were this brilliant comedy clip with a German (read: Nazi) being unable to cope with the bus being late in England... But now I can't find it :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

Damn... There were this brilliant comedy clip with a German (read: Nazi) being unable to cope with the bus being late in England... But now I can't find it :(

---

A Harry Enfield sketch I believe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vuk

A Harry Enfield sketch I believe.

---

Bingo!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7W7q7pWygU

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

Wow, you really present yourself as someone unable to absorb the simplest fact. Single versus double quotes. You're using the European version, commie.

Why do you hate American grammar and punctuation?

---

Sorry Lemur - that's a myth.

The only rule with quote is that you have to use one type inside the other, so either double inside single or vice versa.

OP:

This isn't simply a "political" question though, is it?

This is a moral question - we forswear family when we find their actions or beliefs repulsive. NAZI's are just an example of repulsive political beliefs but we'd equally forswear a child molester, rapist, or anti-semite.

Haven't been in a while but I just wanted to chime in. I hate talking about politics, especially because so many people are even more stupid than I find a way too be. But mostly because I find it to be an exercise in futility especially with individuals my age. My father on the other hand hates talking with his family because they are all liberal New Englanders and very arrogant and rude about it. Despite being the one who made the most out of himself they act like he is a buffoon and it annoys me let alone him. Every time we see them or he talks to them he is inexorably pulled into a political discussion which will result in rather heated Irish discourse. It has sadly gotten to the point where he hasn't been back to see his family since his mother died. Even his aunties and uncles (great aunts and uncles) who absolutely adore him since he was the first born of the family. Its especially sad because it is mostly his brothers and sisters.

So despite being the resident loudmouth hot head you all know me as I absolutely loathe talking about politics with liberal friends mostly because I have seen how disastrous it can be and I dislike pointless confrontation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Centurion1

especially because so many people are even more stupid than I find a way too be.

---

doing fine heh

I wish there was a way to "select all" on a member's posts and "thank" every one of them. I would do that for Vuk. Every one of his posts provides me with a giggle. Keep on Vukin' ma man...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

doing fine heh

---

Actually I think I may be right. But I am terrible at grammar so I am not sure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

You're not.

---

He's American, You have to give him some respect for at least trying to master the English language.

Alright sorry as I said I am not very good at grammar.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

It's okay. Grammar is overrated anyway.

---

Yeah, who wants to articulate their thoughts in written form anyway?

Don't get me wrong, grammar should NEVER EVER be used to dictate someones mental abilities on the internet, unless of course it is their native language.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

The great thing about English is that it is the ultimate mongrel language. I find that those who speak it the worst are often most in tune with its best qualities. The internet, in particular, was just made for English.

---

0111100101101111011101010010000001101101011010010110011101101000011101000010000001100010011001010010 0000011100100110100101100111011010000111010000100000011110010110111101110101001000000110110101101001 011001110110100001110100001000000110001001100101001000000111011101110010011011110110111001100111

EDIT: forum rules says you are not allowed to write in other languages than English. So the translation is: "You might be right, You might be wrong"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Centurion1

Alright sorry as I said I am not very good at grammar.

---

I am sorry, was being a jerk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

I find that those who speak it the worst are often most in tune with its best qualities.

---

ya mang, USA #1, luv it or leave it. $moke w33d erry day420 thats why i bailed eng class and just chilled at the 7-11. teachar tried to fail, me but i did well enough on my last esse to get my C- #SWAG

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

Don't get me wrong, grammar should NEVER EVER be used to dictate someones mental abilities on the internet, unless of course it is their native language.

---

Ah, so having Dyslexia should be used to dictate someones mental ability? It isn't even correlated with the IQ.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kival

Ah, so having Dyslexia should be used to dictate someones mental ability? It isn't even correlated with the IQ.

---

Not entirely true. The way you are meant to diagnose Dyslexic is via an IQ test. I forgot the actual test used, but they test a range of different areas with an assessor which shows all the strong and weaks points. People with Dyslexia are usually spotted because they do really poorly in the language section, but do very good in the others. Obviously, this shows the person is not "stupid", and thus there must be some actual problem in that idea.

For example, the test I took only measured up to 140 iq, and I scored 138, even though I did significantly worse in the language areas due to my dyslexia. Though just for reference, there is no 'real' reliable test that can score above 140, the ability to test degrades over 130 and over 140 is not seen as clinical valid or reliable (so my 168 Mensa test score isn't really valid)

Only big issue with this testing system is that in a way, it assumes "dumb people cannot have dyslexia" because there is no way to actually 'see it' statistically.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kival

Ah, so having Dyslexia should be used to dictate someones mental ability? It isn't even correlated with the IQ.

---

Of course not.

I'm not sure dyslexia, or rather SLI (specific language impairment), is the most likely culprit in this case though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tiaexz

Not entirely true. The way you are meant to diagnose Dyslexic is via an IQ test. (...)
Only big issue with the testing system is that in a way, it assumes "dumb people cannot have dyslexia" because there is no way to actually 'see it' statistically.

---

I see. You may clearly know more about the issue, I only read this publication:

http://pss.sagepub.com/content/21/1/93

Out of the abstract:

Quote:

---

We show that in typical readers, reading and IQ development are dynamically linked over time. Such mutual interrelationships are not perceptible in dyslexic readers, which suggests that reading and cognition develop more independently in these individuals. To our knowledge, these findings provide the first empirical demonstration of a coupling between cognition and reading in typical readers and a developmental uncoupling between cognition and reading in dyslexic readers.

---

I did not mean - but was unclear about that - that dyslexia doesn't effect the IQ-Test at all. :bow:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kival

I did not mean - but was unclear about that - that dyslexia doesn't effect the IQ-Test at all. :bow:

---

Possibly true, depending on the test! Though the way they actually come to the diagnosis is via an IQ test. But then again, I did score really highly with dyslexia, if my 'weak areas' which were affected by my dyslexia were on par with my other areas, I would have scored significantly higher. The difference was between getting 19-20 out of 20 for different area, and scoring 10-11 in areas which indicate dyslexia. Was very insightful when reading through my assessment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kival

I see. You may clearly know more about the issue, I only read this publication:

http://pss.sagepub.com/content/21/1/93

Out of the abstract:



I did not mean - but was unclear about that - that dyslexia doesn't effect the IQ-Test at all. :bow:

---

You can design an IQ test that let dyslexic people be on the same level as others. Just do the instructions orally and skip all text in questions and answers.


Also, let's remember that dyslexia doesn't directly hurt grammar. I have had some students with dyslexia, and one of them actually got an A in Swedish. She got audiobooks instead of books, I also completely separated her spelling learning from writing.

She was just AMAZING at making stories, not writing stories of course, but making them. When she made stories, I had her plan it with pictures instead of words, and then she got help with the actual writing.

One example, the class got an assignment to make a remake of a story we had just read. I spent some time about talking about "sucking the reader right in", and the importance of how you open a book and a chapter.

She handed in her paper, and first line went "I don't mean to scare You now, but I am dead." Yepp, she sucked the reader straight in at once alright. She was only 11!!

And that wasn't like "the" example of her brilliance, these things came on a regular basis.

I see. Despite the paper and some internet-knowledge, I only know the typical "dyslexia"-genius: (Very) Good in math and abstract thinking, terrible ortography and also grammar, very bad in learning foreign languages. She even writes books (so far without success) with interesting stories but I have the impression that the dylexia also leads to less sophisticated "formal" aspects of writing. Not only mistakes in orthograph and grammar (which are easily corrected) but also lacking a feeling how to write the story well. Story arch, tension etc. are good but the literary instruments (1) are lacking.

Of course this doesn't have to be related to the dyslexia. I'll not claim one (or rather few examples) to be conclusive.

(1) Not sure, if this is a good translation für "literarisches Handwerkzeug", but didn't know how to translate it otherwise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kival

I see. Despite the paper and some internet-knowledge, I only know the typical "dyslexia"-genius: (Very) Good in math and abstract thinking, terrible ortography and also grammar, very bad in learning foreign languages. She even writes books (so far without success) with interesting stories but I have the impression that the dylexia also leads to less sophisticated "formal" aspects of writing. Not only mistakes in orthograph and grammar (which are easily corrected) but also lacking a feeling how to write the story well. Story arch, tension etc. are good but the literary instruments (1) are lacking.

Of course this doesn't have to be related to the dyslexia. I'll not claim one (or rather few examples) to be conclusive.

(1) Not sure, if this is a good translation für "literarisches Handwerkzeug", but didn't know how to translate it otherwise.

---

Translation looks about right to me, but I'm sure both your English and German is better than mine anyway, honestly, I wing it a LOT.

Well, dyslexia often does lead to less sophisticated formal aspects of writing, because many parents and schools are ill equipped to give the dyslexic kids ways to work around their issues.

That's what I meant with it not directly being a factor. Indirectly and in practise it's of course a factor, but my point is that a dyslexic kid with dedicated parents and a teacher who cares to read up on stuff have no reason to do worse than others.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

That's what I meant with it not directly being a factor. Indirectly and in practise it's of course a factor, but my point is that a dyslexic kid with dedicated parents and a teacher who cares to read up on stuff have no reason to do worse than others.

---

That must be a very swedish thought. In german teachers don't really react to individual problems. At best they sent child and parent to a psychologist. It is or was very difficult in Germany, too, as our teacher-student relation was quite bad (around 30:1). I've heard it has become better, though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kival

That must be a very Swedish thought. In german teachers don't really react to individual problems. At best they sent child and parent to a psychologist. It is or was very difficult in Germany, too, as our teacher-student relation was quite bad (around 30:1). I've heard it has become better, though.

---

It is much better now, EASPD has done wonders in Germany. You still have a way to go though, but given how far you have come in just 70 years... :hide:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

Translation looks about right to me, but I'm sure both your English and German is better than mine anyway, honestly, I wing it a LOT.

Well, dyslexia often does lead to less sophisticated formal aspects of writing, because many parents and schools are ill equipped to give the dyslexic kids ways to work around their issues.

That's what I meant with it not directly being a factor. Indirectly and in practice it's of course a factor, but my point is that a dyslexic kid with dedicated parents and a teacher who cares to read up on stuff have no reason to do worse than others.

---

I can't speak to formal writing style in Swdesh or German, but as an Anglophone Dyslexic I can tel you that there is a difference between the way Dyslexics write, stylistically, compared to non Dyslexics. We tend to punctuate for rhythm rather than meaning, and we produce constructions which mirror our vocal patterns, rather than written grammar.

Put another way, Dyslexics don't learn to write so much as they learn to transcribe speech.

Dyslexics tend to make good playwrites, poets, actors, and to lesser extend novelists for this reason.

The bad at leaning foreign languages is a new one on me, and makes little sense, unless you mean writing​ or reading a foreign language, which is separate from learning one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla

I can't speak to formal writing style in Swdesh or German, but as an Anglophone Dyslexic I can tel you that there is a difference between the way Dyslexics write, stylistically, compared to non Dyslexics. We tend to punctuate for rhythm rather than meaning, and we produce constructions which mirror our vocal patterns, rather than written grammar.

Put another way, Dyslexics don't learn to write so much as they learn to transcribe speech.

Dyslexics tend to make good playwrites, poets, actors, and to lesser extend novelists for this reason.

The bad at leaning foreign languages is a new one on me, and makes little sense, unless you mean writing​ or reading a foreign language, which is separate from learning one.

---

Yhere's also a huge variety of dyslexia. For example, some throw the letters around a bit when writing, some when reading, some constantly miss a part of the word(typically the ending), some forget entire words in a sentence while writing all the others words correctly(like my "my house blue" instead of "my house is blue"), etc etc.

As for "diagnosing" dyslexia:

Dyslexia is indeed only applicable to those who perform average or above in other subjects. The same goes for dyscalculi, the math equivalent. That doesn't mean we don't have a way to "determine dyslexia" in below-average students, however. The short version:

If you're crap at reading, but do well on other stuff, you have dyslexia.
If you're crap at reading and a bunch of other stuff, we have a different term for your situation.

There really isn't more to it than that. Dyslexia and dyscalculi is defined as "poor at reading/math, but good at everything else". If that description doesn't fit you, you don't have dyslexia/dyscalculi.

For details, as I reacquired my report.

It was the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale - Third UK Edition (WAIS-III UK) that was used for diagnosis in my case. (Fourth edition is out now)

Here is Wikipedia link.
and a random google obtained article .

Just so people have an understanding of what I meant by IQ test and not simply thinking I was meaning something like this.

Indeed.

Having dyslexia means you're too dumb to read and/or write.



The social acceptance associated with dyslexia is something I find puzzling.

Do you mean to trip up those who haven't read your previous posts?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Montmorency

Do you mean to trip up those who haven't read your previous posts?

---

Who, me?

I stand by every word in both of my posts. ~;)

Edit: Ima gunna start a new thread for this topic, so Kadagar can use this thread to stay friendless ~;)

I'm sorry, but I just can't square it with all the posts I've read by you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Montmorency

I'm sorry, but I just can't square it with all the posts I've read by you.

---

Well, HoreTore is known for clever trolling from time to time, but I'm still not clear on his angle for this one.

Ajax