My New Favorite Response

I’ve noticed that a lot of people, if not most, have sharp disagreements with what they hallucinate to be my opinions. There are several skeptic-oriented websites that talk about my belief in magic and ESP. The skeptics leave brutal comments ripping me apart for my irrational beliefs. The only problem is that I don’t believe in magic or ESP. Someone with poor reading comprehension misunderstood something I wrote in one of my books and then convinced the other gullible, non-fact-checking skeptics that his hallucinations are true. It’s deliciously ironic.

Some evolution-oriented websites talk about my support for creationism and deride me for it. That would be fair if I supported creationism.

Recently I’ve been criticized for my opinion that people shouldn’t be allowed to e-mail a copy of a Dilbert comic to a friend. I don’t hold that opinion, but it doesn’t seem to matter.

Anyway, I’m trying out my new favorite response to the people who get angry over their hallucinations of my opinions:

“I agree with your analysis of your hallucination.”

In most cases I do agree with the argument presented. It’s only the premise that has a problem. Most of it sounds like this: “Scott Adams thinks that if an ear of corn has sex with a unicycle the offspring will be a unicorn. This is scientifically impossible!”

I used to say, “I don’t believe that!” But it sounds too disagreeable. Now I will just say, “I agree with your analysis of your hallucination.” That way I’m the kind of agreeable person you want as a friend.

Comments

[Diana W]

I think they're more delusions than hallucinations. Hallucinations tend to go away once one stops drinking, doing drugs or otherwise harming your body. Delusions take years of therapy. I think you're dealing with the latter.

[Ezekiel]

I would like to point out in Mr. Adams defense, that becasue of his marketing desicions I receive dilbert free in my email every day. Back off, leave him alone. If you piss him off too much...HE WILL STOP MAKING DILBERT! SO SHUT UP!

[Mark Cohen]

Ooh, I'm having a hallucination. I think it was the shrooms I had for lunch. There's a fat-ass purple wizard sticking his head out my nose, saying "Scott, don't let the Great Unwashed faze you". Just because they can type while picking their noses and yelling at Darlene doesn't give them the right to be taken seriously ;o)

Oh, and I email dilbert cartoons to my mates fairly often. I also happen to buy your books. and read your blog. I'm happy with all three.

[Tygerblade]

You know Scott, unicorns have feelings too!! Why do you feel the need to insult their parentage like that, eh??

I'm forming a new group to put a stop to this sort of abuse!! I'll call it the Ant-Defamation League of Horny Horses!! Only I'll have to re-arrange the wording a bit to make the acronym funnier....

[Doug]

But Scott, without freewill can you really fault these people?

[Ajay]

is this Scoot Adam, STILL? he used to be funny - if he not funny anymore?

I think he still is. So, why are people pissed at him..

let me know
ajay

an IITan ( a breed Scoot made famous)

SCOTT: you should write something about IIT.. u are hallucinating - now - are u being delusionary? no amount of - I agree to disagree - will ever satiate your critics ! now really write something about IIT - we LOVEed that script.. it makes u known in a large part of the world ( well, its called Silicon Valley + the . well you know..)

[bear454]

Scott, I agree with your analysis of your hallucination.

[Bruce Harrison]

While you could use the term 'hallucination' in this context, it would be more proper to use the word 'delusion.' The distinction between the two words is subtle, but I think the latter would better make your point.

The reason for this is that a hallucination exists solely in a person's mind, while a delusion is more the holding of a false belief against evidence to the contrary -- in psychiatry, a delusion is defined as the holding of a false belief in spite of strong invalidating evidence.

Put another way, if someone were to believe that Scott Adams visits their living room every night, they would be hallucinating. However, if someone were to say that "Scott Adams believes in creationism," then they're delusional. So your statement would be better said as, "I agree with your analysis of your delusion."

You can have a lot of fun with this. A parlor game could be constructed wherein people would be challenged to determine if a particular person's belief was a hallucination or a delusion. Let's try a few:

"Al Gore's belief in Global Warming is a. . ."

"Nancy Pelosi's belief that the Constitution gives her the authority to negotiate for the United States with Syria is a. . ."

"Dianne Feinstein's belief that no one would notice when she awarded all those military contracts to her husband's companies was a. . ." Oh, wait a minute. Almost nobody DID notice that one.

"Democrats' belief that the "culture of corruption" applies only to Republicans is a. . ."

So you see, Scott, you can have tons of fun with this, as well as reaching new levels of precision. Good luck!

[Bruce Harrison]

While you could use the term 'hallucination' in this context, it would be more proper to use the word 'delusion.' The distinction between the two words is subtle, but I think the latter would better make your point.

The reason for this is that a hallucination exists solely in a person's mind, while a delusion is more the holding of a false belief against evidence to the contrary -- in psychiatry, a delusion is defined as the holding of a false belief in spite of strong invalidating evidence.

Put another way, if someone were to believe that Scott Adams visits their living room every night, they would be hallucinating. However, if someone were to say that "Scott Adams believes in creationism," then they're delusional. So your statement would be better said as, "I agree with your analysis of your delusion."

You can have a lot of fun with this. A parlor game could be constructed wherein people would be challenged to determine if a particular person's belief was a hallucination or a delusion. Let's try a few:

"Al Gore's belief in Global Warming is a. . ."

"Nancy Pelosi's belief that the Constitution gives her the authority to negotiate for the United States with Syria is a. . ."

"Dianne Feinstein's belief that no one would notice when she awarded all those military contracts to her husband's companies was a. . ." Oh, wait a minute. Almost nobody DID notice that one.

"Democrats' belief that the "culture of corruption" applies only to Republicans is a. . ."

So you see, Scott, you can have tons of fun with this, as well as reaching new levels of precision. Good luck!

[Leora]

My father's line: "You're certainly entitled to your opinion...even if you're wrong."

I like using, "Unbelievable!" or even "Who would have thought it?" Because often the opinion is entirely unbelievable, but the response can easily be mistaken for approval and wonderment.

"And that's how unicorns are created!"
"Unbelievable! Who would have thought it?"

[ND]

Just an observation, Scott. When you say "Someone with poor reading comprehension misunderstood something I wrote in one of my books and then convinced the other gullible, non-fact-checking skeptics that his hallucinations are true", you're assuming that the problem is with the reader's comprehension skills, and not allowing that perhaps you, the writer, didn't express yourself clearly enough. That comes off sounding arrogant.

Or maybe I just hallucinated that you said that.

[John]

That was funny. You are free to halucinate that I think it was humorless and an affront to Islam and I will agree with that also.

[Steffen]

I will copy that phrase whenever the need arises...

[More]

Did he actually know he had it? I cannot see on my back, maybe I have one too. If nobody tells him he may go through life shunned.

I'll be in the bathroom now with my digital camera to see if I should get a trimmer for my back.

[ipsissimus_clay]

Funny and useful, the way all posts should be. You just got that little bit more worthy, Scott.

And PS - thanks a massive bundle to whoever it was that coined the term 'hallucinalysis' in their post - I most definately will be using that one. This is such a great place to find fun new words.

[Are Riksaasen]

I know you don't believe in ESP or magic. I checked it out, using ESP and magic off course, the only source of true information.

[just_human]

Thank God for RSS feeds. I was gone this weekend, so I saw the post, and the post below it saying the original one was deleted. So I made sure to read the post instead of just opening it in a new window and closing the original.

The original post was about Anna Nicole, because we haven't heard enough about her. She's basically famous for being the highest paid prostitute in history. I love our society.

[Kellen]

Amen brother. I agree.

[Simon Robert]

If people have no free will, how can they choose to steer their path into dimensions to produce outcomes more to their liking, as you suggested in the dilbert future? Or have I just committed hallucinalysis?

[Michal Malkowski]

"..and then he voted....

Posted by: Bsquared | April 15, 2007 at 03:52 AM "

This post is simply priceless.

Scott, you totally suck. you wrote like what - 20(?) lines up there? And here we have a genius, that with 4 words - won everyones hearts!
I might be wrong, but IMO most of people just thought it was supposed to make XXX look stupid - where as XXX you can put anyone in like 30 posts radius + SA :D
See, THAT is how you make people like you :D

[Richard]

Your Governor has nothing to worry about...I don't think that he would be recklessly speeding to knock up any OTH bunnies. He's already knock up into that old school Kennedy money. Yall just need to focus on keeping him off the slopes.

[Beaker]

I was going to write something witty and smart-alecky in this spot. Now I can't because I'm too busy laughing at the great posts others have put in.

At this point, just nod sagely and say, "I understand." That's how my cousin Milton used to deal with the "hallucinations" of others. It's become a kind of family mantra. The beauty of it is, it covers just about every situation, even the non-verbal ones.

Dilbert comes home from work one day and begins repeatedly mashing his head into the closet door. Dogbert enters, observes this with pleasure, nods sagely and says, "I understand" and walks out, leaving a confused Dilbet staring after him.

[jerry w]

As a former Hoosier, I have to object to your constant promotion of the idea that corn should be used in scientific sexual experiments. When I lived in Indianoplace, people that used ears of corn at the Kinsey foundation found that corn on the cob was useable but not too practical, they found that the butter often used as a lubricant was hard on (sorry) the arteries.
And your suggestion of sex between corn and unicorns is just as impractical, the word unicorn itself says that only one (uni) ear is correct for them, and besides, they run too fast to mate that way. Not that I tried that.....

http://boskolives.wordpress.com/

[webar]

The flaw in your argument is that people who hallucinate conversations do so continuously. Not only do they make up opinions for you, they generously also make up your other talking points. Thus, your witty rejoiner becomes, upon hallucination: "you silly lemon eater, I renounce you, and all of your dearly held, stupid, lemon eating philosophies."

There are people you just can't please, no matter how funny, reasonable or thoughtful you are.

[OldUgly]

Early in my career, I had two mentors.

When I would go to them with something I thought was a problem, they had very different responses.

The first would always (not exaggerating) start off his response with "No.". This would be followed by a moment of thought, and then an explanation of his opinion. We would argue for 10 minutes until I realized our opinion was the same, and he was being contrary. I would go away frustrated.

The second would always start of his response with "Yes" quickly followed with his opinion. We would have a five minute discussion from which I went away happy. Only afterwards would I realize his opinion was opposite of mine, and that he had swayed my opinion with no apparent resistance.

Based on this experience, I believe your new strategy will more successful than the old one.