[MD] Flying Spagetti Monsters

[pholden at davtv.com]

Quoting ian glendinning <psybertron at gmail.com>:

> OK Platt, (Arlo & DMB mentioned) on the assumption that you are
> actually interested in answers to your questions, and not just
> "yanking my chain" as DMB would put it ...
> 
> Do I think my insults "are" constructive ?
> Not necessarily, but at least I admit them when I stoop to them.
> Yours are generally couched in innuendo, slur and downright
> disrespectful misrepresentation, in my humble opinion and
> experience.You are in constant denial of that. (And if anyone
> challenges you on it, you continue to pile on the rhetoric, IMHO, etc)
> 
> Do I think insults "can be" constructive ?
> We are back to the ad-hominem debates .... Yes, there is a time and a
> place, if used sparingly, to grab attention, to make a point, to get a
> de-railed discussion to recognize where it's headed, etc. but ongoing
> attention grabbing is clearly tiresome for all. Respect is the key.
> 
> Is everything I say ipso-facto constructive ?
> Not ipso-facto, but as some level it is always intended to be, even an
> insult - my intent - that I can state with 100% certainty. You need to
> break eggs to make an omelette.
> 
> Is everything you say ignorant and fraudulent ?
> No. I didn't say that. I do support your points in an unbiassed manner
> where I consider them valid - several times even during this thread.
> What I find ignorant and fraudulent is the idea that you are actually
> interested in achieving anything like progress in your arguments. You
> are one of the more active participants over a long period, and I
> would say, as Arlo has, that historical evidence is that you rarely
> respond with direct opinions to direct questions and more often than
> not respond with rhetorical twists, that undermine the individual
> without addressing the subject (and almost always injects a political
> ideology angle).
> 
> But that could change ... though my "case closed" comments indicate
> that such hopes are worn thin. What is your omelette ?
> 
> I'm gonna regret this I already know.

I'm happy you feel better getting this off your chest. What you need to do
it seems to me is back up your various charges with specific examples, if you
are interested in "achieving anything like progress in your argument." :-)
As for introducing politics, I see nothing inherently wrong with that. Most
opinions are ultimately political.  As for "undermining the individual," 
contributors here are perfectly capable of standing up for themselves. And
you will notice most of them do not find it necessary to resort to the rhetorical
device of the smear "to grab attention, to make a point, or to get a de-railed
discussion to recognize where it's headed, etc." They agree with Pirsig that ad
hominem attacks are evil, and simply state their case.

Platt

 






-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/