Toby
Member
Registered: Jul 2000
Location:
Posts: 3034 |
Just when you thought it was safe to go back into the water, I finally get some free time to respond...
quote: Originally posted by BobbyMike
Dick, the other guys were meant to be Plato, et al. (My readings of their lives made me believe rightly, or wrongly that they were pretty ornery and didn't get along with hardly anyone and were persecuted and not really appreciated much during their own lives)
So why exactly was that a problem? Jesus was also pretty ornery and didn't get along with hardly anyone (relatively speaking) and was persecuted (and prosecuted) and not really appreciated much during his own life.
quote: Toby, I don't feel it's necessary to go with the flow, or do what's easy. I have always hoed my own line (a Southern term meaning to go my own way).
Why exactly would you think I couldn't figure out what "hoed my own line" meant? Sure, "hoed my own row" or "toed my own line" might have made more sense, but it's not like most of us are idiots here.
quote: I don't work for a major, or minor corporation. I don't have a mortgage on my home. I homeschool my kids. I am a committed Christian. I'm an art school drop out( most of my friends from that time all became scientists- turbine rotors, robotics, and chemical engineer/chip designers) who went into the USMC (where I chose the Presidential Service unit over crypto school). All three of my boys were born at home. All of those decisions have meant going against the crowd of people around me. all of them were right for me though, so as hard as they were I did them.
Then why exactly do you seek to tell others how they should deal with things?
I'm really not going to deal with the majority of the religious stuff here...
quote: {...}
Toby, maybe you could find that passage in the Bible where Jesus took the time to argue with someone and tell me where it is. I can't seem to find it.
You could try the book of Mark (somewhere around chapter 11, IIRC). With some reading between the lines, Jesus having a good spirited debate with the representatives of the Sanhedrin sounds exactly like what could have happened (I say could because I'm not one that believes the Bible is a literal and true document as being a proven fact).
quote: (I think the "turning over of tables" you mention was in reference to the time he overturned the moneychangers tables inside the temple. As I said he was known for being able to demonstrate anger. He didn't argue then though, he just said his piece and moved on.
Except by doing this, it provoked one of the very instances which I'm referring to. Also, WRT "argue", I almost never connote that in the schoolyard "am not" "are too" sense.
quote: Toby, Bill/Pix didn't hit you (as far as I know, or do you guys have a history?), he posted something. Your analogy does not make sense.
My analogy makes perfect sense. When someone commits an act of violence upon you (you obviously believe that words can be violent, or your statements here would be moot), what does it matter if they've never done it before?
quote: You were never in danger of physical harm. Why the hostile tone?
If there's no danger, then why should you care what I tell someone else? Why exactly did you feel the need to take anyone to task if you felt that words were harmless? As far as my tone is concerned, we're not talking. You have no frame of reference to tell what tone I'm using. Please don't try to project hostility where it isn't present. Pretend that Commander Data is reading my words (I'd pick another INTP, but I think the humor value of sounding like Commander Data is speaking for me is more fitting).
quote: Toby, as to what's "natural" in conversation- observe people talking.
I do. I even participate on occasion. Why exactly would you think I've no clue as to how people talk?
quote: Most people generally don't parse sentences and deconstruct other peoples conversations while speaking to them.
Most people also don't talk for several paragraphs worth of material at a time and expect people to respond in the same diatribe type format. One person says a sentence or two, and the other responds to that and conversation progresses. Actually, if you read my posts conversationally, they'll probably sound much more natural than most of the rant or diatribe posts that people typically post. That might also help to remove the "debate" stigma that you seem to hold and impose upon my words.
quote: Conversation (when people talk) flows in nonlinear fashions, building on what has been said and thought by all parties.
Yes, it does, but it also (hopefully) weaves and flows into a clear message. It is not a hodgepodge of monologues.
quote: It is usually circular in pattern. I did not dictate that. I observed that. Others have too. They have written books on it. Social scientists develop theories about it and teach about it at universities.
Yes, and I have read many of those books and taken many of those classes. However, I'm also a thinking human being who can synthesize all of those thoughts into a coherent whole and form my own conclusions.
quote: What we are doing here is not "natural", meaning induced by our natural surroundings.
It's as natural as any other gathering place. If I go to a PUG meeting, that's just as "unnatural" as coming here.
quote: We have gone out of our natural world and into a (brave) new man-made one.
I'm sure the first men to build homes and plant crops thought the same thing.
quote: Man-made = artificial = not natural.
Man-made != artificial != not natural. People are man-made, so that does not de facto mean artificial or not natural. Artificial means a product of skill or "artifice". This skill and artifice may most certainly be natural. AAMOF, one could even argue that it was designed in there by whatever created us. What could be more natural?
quote: Toby, your remark about my remark being patronizing is interesting-
Oh goodie! Two people in the same thread trying to psychoanalyze me. With all this free counseling, who needs shrinks?
quote: How do you know what I meant?
Honestly, I've no idea what you meant unless you tell me. I just know what you said.
quote: Because you read something as patronizing doesn't make it written so
And because you didn't mean for something to be patronizing doesn't mean that it wasn't. By posting what you did, you were taking the position that you understood what was going on better than those involved. Furthermore, you stated that they (we) were wrong (no, you didn't state it directly, but there really isn't much of another conclusion implicated in what you said).
quote: (a poll on how many who read those remarks and did, or did not take them to be patronizing would be interesting).
It might be interesting, but it really wouldn't be useful.
quote: I read (and wrote) my remarks as earnest and heartfelt, you read them as patronizing.
Those two concepts are not mutually exclusive. I didn't say that you might not honestly believe that you were justified in saying what you did. To minorly touch upon the religion thing again, many Christians try to convert the "unwashed" in a heartfelt and earnest manner, however, this does not make their remarks any less patronizing to the non-Christians. It's just the "white man's burden" manifesting itself again in a different way.
quote: Am I right and you wrong, or are am I wrong and you right?
Maybe one...maybe the other...maybe both...maybe neither. I'm couldn't really care less about "right" or "wrong" in this instance. If communication is acheived, that's about the best that can be done at this point.
quote: Who decides thr truth of the matter? You, me, independent non-partisan judge, or everybody involved by consensus? I apologized for the way you read it. That, and trying to explain my intent is all I can do.
I'm pretty sure that I understood your intent. I didn't think it was malicious. I remember an old saying about the road to Hell, though.
quote: Patronizing someone means that you feel in some way superior to someone and I don't believe I have ever said, or implied that I thought I was better than you, or anyone, at any time on this board.
If you didn't think that you knew a "better" way to handle things, then why even say anything?
quote: Were you being patronizing about your "condolences", or was that a joke?
Neither. I can't see how people who don't like to/can't work on their own PCs even bother with the things. I know what I'm doing with the things, and they're extremely frustrating at times, so I can't see how non-PC tech oriented people bother with them.
quote: I find it very interesting that you are expressing yourself in this way.
I find it interesting that you find it interesting. ;>
quote: Does it bother you for someone to disagree with you?
Depends on their manner of disagreement, and how well it's backed up.
quote: I had a contrary opinion, why deconstruct it and in the name of "truth" insult me?
I'm not sure exactly what you're taking as an insult "in the name of 'truth'", but whatever it is, I apologize.
quote: By the way, you might not believe it, but consensus is actaully pretty integral to civilization.
Yes, and it's also a source of many problems with civilization. Consensus does not make something "right".
quote: With out consensus we can't choose leaders, agree on a common language, settle on a medium of exchange,
{...}institutionalize racism and prejudice, kill a bunch of people over religious/political/cultural reasons, etc. {...}
quote: or as a people go forward- much less choose a restaurant.
Again, consensus doesn't mean much, in and of itself.
quote: IMHO "The search for a Truth" is usually a solitary task, and better that way- it's less likely you will disagree with anyone.
It's also less likely that you'll find the truth that way. The concept of truth (or religion or science for that matter) rests upon the simple concept that there are absolutes outside of the influence of our perceptions. This is why scientists have peer reviews, and religious scholars have debates. It is not so much consensus that they are looking for as much as trying to get as many to test their theories as possible. They are trying to prove them in the more archaic sense of the word (as in "it's the exception that proves the rule").
quote: Also when the Truth changes, less people have to learn how to think different.
The truth doesn't change. We only find out that what we thought was the truth was wrong or different from our perceptions.
quote: Also, I know how to do quotes, I was joking.
White man really do speak with forked tongue. -<
|