Jump to content

Talk:Acceptance

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

OLD: Acceptance is a cognitive activity or state that is the opposite of resistance. I feel like a more specific definition with perhaps an example or a personal experience of feeling acceptance would be good to add here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Evelynvpizarra (talk • contribs) 05:47, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's only the spiritual/psychology sense that's being dealt with here.

I think "activity or state" is good, but it's not much help defining one vague, tricky term as the opposite of another. I feel the antonymic sense of resistance should be noted with reservations.

I deleted the paragraph contrasting acceptance with approval, sympathy, liking , tolerance , and affinity. Of these, I think only tolerance is worth the space, but the deleted text did little to distinguish among these senses. Perhaps also surrender and resignation could be included in a discussion of overlapping terms?

More applications are needed alongside Buddhism. Meditation, Islam, other faiths...?

The note on Buddhists accepting Buddha as a higher being is plain wrong. I'm removing this. 2.18.10 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.224.224.153 (talk) 21:35, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re Minorities: "on equal terms in all aspects of" adds nothing to "full participation."

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 20 April 2021 and 23 July 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Dkayliee.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 13:18, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WRT the last comment above...

[edit]

...does anyone else find the last paragraph in this articel suspicious? It sounds strange to me... 68.39.174.238 17:57, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting that no mention of forgiveness as related to acceptance is offered as either an associated emotion, or as an associated meaning. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.201.224.2 (talk) 20:22, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Something seems off about the "grief acceptance" section...

I would not call the last paragraph "suspicious", but it is very badly written. "Acceptance of one's beliefs" seems a little "spiritual/new age" to me... What about acceptance of your acceptance of your beliefs? The part about "A single person..." is meaningless, or at least, adds nothing to the article... we all know it is important to be accepted and that it is good for one's self esteem etc., but stating that does not define the concept. (124.148.131.140 (talk) 13:13, 13 September 2011 (UTC)) In addition to the above... the article is about acceptance as a concept, not what different people around the world accept or believe. Acceptance is not characterised by Christians as "forgiveness"; one does not "forgive" someone for being a child, one accepts children. The section on beliefs should only compare the similarities and differences between the concepts of acceptance and belief. (124.148.131.140 (talk) 13:34, 13 September 2011 (UTC))[reply]

there are many persuasive writing techniques used to define this article. very strange that an emotion can be described as a "psychological defence mechanism" of "maturity". almost as if this article aims to define acceptance as only possibly of one biological sex — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.141.154.22 (talk) 02:25, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Self acceptance

[edit]

The section on self acceptance seems to me as having an inappropriate tone, especially the use of the second person (as if lecturing the reader).

Tony0964 (talk) 03:01, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Types

[edit]

At the bottom of the Types section there is an odd line that reads: "Acceptance (12 Step definition).. To believe as fact..."

This is meaningless. I would just delete it except I am new to wikipedia editing. Perhaps it can be expanded upon and also referenced. As it stands it is just noise. Wham! Bam! Splat! (talk) 14:19, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Acceptance. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:47, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Acceptance. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:19, 25 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This article had a good topic sentence. The overall article needs more clarity and precise language. There are also many references that need citations. This was flagged by the bots, but need to be added in. The idea of Buddhism or talking about Hinduism in reference to acceptance can be expanded on more. Mophsoph4848 (talk) 19:04, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This article should be deleted

[edit]

This article is one of the worst things I've ever read. It's just a lot of opinion stated as fact. I would disagree with almost every characterization of acceptance in the article and it's not only inaccurate, but since it deals with a health-related topic, dangerous to present this information as fact. The article should be deleted but I'm not going through whatever steps that entails, but this article is harmful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.52.1.166 (talk) 01:24, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Adult Development Winter 2022

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 5 January 2022 and 18 April 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Madimiddledorf (article contribs).

Wiki EDU

[edit]

I like the article because it gives some better explanations about the different types of acceptance. I feel that it can help others realize that there are different types as well. For me, I was a little bit confused about some pictures, so maybe add a little more information about them too. Amvang (talk) 06:50, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Explicit POV

[edit]

The sections "Public Acceptance," "Social Acceptance," "Cultural Acceptance," and "Parental Acceptance" explicitly show the POV of a person, even going as far as to use first person pronouns ("To use the same example as I did for public acceptance, the difference between..." and "As the example we are using the LGBTQ+ community"). Moreover, it keeps promoting the acceptance of the queer community, which regardless of one's reason or opinion, is not the purpose of Wikipedia and should be removed.

I believe examples of acceptance are reasonable, but when the queer community is the only example, it's clear that the author's purpose is not to inform but to push a certain political position on a site where that is discouraged. 68.111.104.244 (talk) 14:11, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Acceptance&oldid=1248812960"