Dana Hedberg wrote:
> If I wanted to have an argument, I would write more like M. Lorrey or L.
> Crocker. =) Bygones. Seriously though, when I talk/write with someone, I
> don't view it as adversarial. I view it more as an attempt by all
> parties to discover something new, together. More of a cooperative
> push/pull towards some undiscovered country of the mind (and all it
> entails), rather than a here's my opinion, bow down. If you'd rather
> have an "argument" I'll oblige, but I'd rather not if it's all the same
> to you. =)
Ha. Well, I understand that some people view my conversational manner as
confrontational or argumentative. I know that in plenty of my posts, I do lose
patience with opinions or statements that I see as uninformed or in willful
denial of the facts, even after the facts have been clearly posted and
referenced. People who prefer to think the best of themselves obviously resent
when I call them by their proper names, names they deserve if they are to
beleive the things they do without significant thought. Other people who do not
like to have their most cherished misconceptions challenged dislike dealing with
myself, or Lee, or others on the list who do not suffer fools so gladly as
others seem willing to do. Being of the school that 'that which does not kill
you makes you stronger', I look at my adversarial manner, which IMHO I actually
rarely release in full force, as a tool by which others may improve themselves.
I know that when others come back at me to bring my own misconceptions to my
attention, it does improve me as well.
That being said, I do not come to the list 'looking for an argument', however,
as seen in the stats posted regarding the percent of the population that
beleives in creationism, there is obviously a large chunk of the population that
is living in Egypt at any given time...
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Oct 02 2000 - 17:34:51 MDT