Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well I'll tell you what, I will stipulate that you may indeed be one of the few that is not committing the kind of "emotionalist" fallacy I spoke of.
I did write of the emotional reasoning thing from a general position. But, I have heard and read a great many people reasoning about this specific case in that manner since it happened, and that kind of knee-jerk desire to hang people gets a kind of knee-jerk response from me I'll admit.
The truth is we may never know. But then again colder cases have been solved so who knows.....
I have it always found it telling that the note was written by who obviously appears to be a woman. I did skim the URL you posted.
This may be a bit far but Patsy was probably bribed or something - it doesn't seem right she would want to kill her own daughter. Either that or Patsy planned it all herself. However I do remember reading about the fam on another news site. Despite numerous claims they murdered their own relative, physical tests on JB's body were performed. Thus, it was proved the murderer was not any of the 3 (mom/dad/big bro).
But it's still possible Patsy wrote the note and had someone else kill her.
Despite numerous claims they murdered their own relative, physical tests on JB's body were performed. Thus, it was proved the murderer was not any of the 3 (mom/dad/big bro).
But it's still possible Patsy wrote the note and had someone else kill her.
No, it was not proved. Are these the sorts of "facts" that lead some of you to your conclusions?
Rarely do people want to believe that parents, particularly mothers, will kill their children. It happens, of course, and, doubly troubling for these same observers, most of these mothers are not "insane." But because so many find it too disturbing to consider, they perform various mental gymnastics to avoid arriving at uncomfortable conclusions.
Well I'll tell you what, I will stipulate that you may indeed be one of the few that is not committing the kind of "emotionalist" fallacy I spoke of.
I did write of the emotional reasoning thing from a general position. But, I have heard and read a great many people reasoning about this specific case in that manner since it happened, and that kind of knee-jerk desire to hang people gets a kind of knee-jerk response from me I'll admit.
The truth is we may never know. But then again colder cases have been solved so who knows.....
This reminds me a bit of the woman on a different forum who weighed into a thread about the Beatles, declaring how "blah" their music was, though she really couldn't care less. Page after page she reiterated how little she cared about the Beatles and that it was the folks taking issue with her who had the emotional investment in the debate. Page after page. At a certain point, it becomes obvious who has the emotional investment in the issue and who does not.
No, it was not proved. Are these the sorts of "facts" that lead some of you to your conclusions?
Rarely do people want to believe that parents, particularly mothers, will kill their children. It happens, of course, and, doubly troubling for these same observers, most of these mothers are not "insane." But because so many find it too disturbing to consider, they perform various mental gymnastics to avoid arriving at uncomfortable conclusions.
LMFAO! I knew it was too good to be true. I have not seen the same news anywhere else. Are these the sorts of "assumptions"/"conclusions" you draw from my post?
I never said I didn't believe it. It's happened before. A la Andrea Yates? Casey Anthony (forgot, was this her name)? Plus a bunch of other women. JB was indeed a contender in beauty pageants, and a relative told me it seemed Patsy was jealous of her so she disagreed with me.
This reminds me a bit of the woman on a different forum who weighed into a thread about the Beatles, declaring how "blah" their music was, though she really couldn't care less. Page after page she reiterated how little she cared about the Beatles and that it was the folks taking issue with her who had the emotional investment in the debate. Page after page. At a certain point, it becomes obvious who has the emotional investment in the issue and who does not.
My emotional investment, if you will, my problem is with that tendency of humans to come to conclusions without thinking about them because it makes them feel good. Next thing you know they're gathered with pitchforks and torches ready to burn the witch so to speak. Next thing you know there's a cindered corpse or person swinging from a tree and none of the mob ever really even understood what they were screaming about.
It's a characteristic inherent to the human animal that has played out in horrible ways again and again through history. It disgusts me and frankly scares the s@#$ out of me. So I have to question all of the little precious pet assumptions. I have to ask the questions that expose the doubts and at least slow down the brute force march of self-righteousness.
My emotional investment, if you will, my problem is with that tendency of humans to come to conclusions without thinking about them because it makes them feel good. Next thing you know they're gathered with pitchforks and torches ready to burn the witch so to speak. Next thing you know there's a cindered corpse or person swinging from a tree and none of the mob ever really even understood what they were screaming about.
It's a characteristic inherent to the human animal that has played out in horrible ways again and again through history. It disgusts me and frankly scares the s@#$ out of me. So I have to question all of the little precious pet assumptions. I have to ask the questions that expose the doubts and at least slow down the brute force march of self-righteousness.
Yes, and thus far you've failed at demonstrating how this phenomenon pertains to the skeptics of the those who claim the Ramseys have been exonerated. Your posts here seem more appropriate for the either the philosophy or psychology forums, not this one. If you perhaps want an appropriate example, look a few posts above when someone postulates that Patsy wrote the note (which probably 95% of you believe, if we placed you under truth serum), but she had no part in murdering her child. All those mental gymnastics performed. For what? Again, I won't be troubled if someone provides a compelling scenario in which an intruder entered, murdered, lingered, wrote and wrote again and then left, with nary a solid lead on the actual perpetrator. It's possible. Highly, highly unlikely, but it's possible.
Yes, and thus far you've failed at demonstrating how this phenomenon pertains to the skeptics of the those who claim the Ramseys have been exonerated. Your posts here seem more appropriate for the either the philosophy or psychology forums, not this one. If you perhaps want an appropriate example, look a few posts above when someone postulates that Patsy wrote the note (which probably 95% of you believe, if we placed you under truth serum), but she had no part in murdering her child. All those mental gymnastics performed. For what? Again, I won't be troubled if someone provides a compelling scenario in which an intruder entered, murdered, lingered, wrote and wrote again and then left, with nary a solid lead on the actual perpetrator. It's possible. Highly, highly unlikely, but it's possible.
Neither failed nor succeeded. I never said I had or would offer proof or an argument for or against the Ramseys or anyone else for that matter. So yes, probably more appropriate for those forums. I'm still right about most people's motive for believing though....
Neither failed nor succeeded. I never said I had or would offer proof or an argument for or against the Ramseys or anyone else for that matter. So yes, probably more appropriate for those forums. I'm still right about most people's motive for believing though....
Why on Earth would you pick this particular case, and the skeptics, in particular, to be the one to exemplify this phenomenon.
Why on Earth would you pick this particular case, and the skeptics, in particular, to be the one to exemplify this phenomenon.
Because they exemplify it so well, textbook case almost.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
