Re: THe OverRelational Manifesto (ORM)

From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 19:18:30 GMT
Message-ID: <a2w1g.62479$VV4.1168116@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>

Marshall Spight wrote:

> Alfredo Novoa wrote:
>

>>>>>Of course you can shuffle words "stupid" "idiot" and "shit" (You seem
>>>>>to be master of this action)
>>
>>>Incorrect. There is never justification to use such words. Never.
>>
>>That's your opinion.

>
> Correct. When you are reading a usenet post, you can scroll
> up to the top to see the sender of the message. That is
> whose opinion you are reading.
>

>>>This does not mean one cannot strongly refute others' ideas.
>>>But the above words don't address ideas at all, do they?
>>
>>They can be used to describe a big part of the ideas posted here.

>
> They can be so used, but they should not be so used.

Such things were said to Churchill when he called someone 'that bad man over there'.

>>Forrest Gump's mother said stupid is what stupid does.

>
> Indeed. That is why, when I am discussing issues such
> as civility with people who are ignorant on the topic, or
> who have some innate difficulty with it, I try to be
> patient and polite, in the same way that I try to be
> patient and polite with those who are ignorant or who
> have difficulty with technical subjects. Likewise, I hope
> for patience and politeness from my superiors in whatever
> field or context.
>
> Sometimes I fail, of course; such is the human condition.
> But I still try.
>
> Politeness is the hallmark of civilization; in its complete
> absense, civilization itself is impossible. I am not exaggerating.

With all due respect, civilization in the complete absense of rudeness is similarly impossible. This is a particularly important issue throughout civilization today at a time when the mandarins in the EU struggle with how to avoid calling an islamic terrorist an islamic terrorist while islamic terrorists are murdering european intellectuals.

>>>In fact, I believe the best way to raise the level of discourse
>>>on this newsgroup would be for extended further reading. In
>>>particular, I am thinking of Miss Manners.
>>
>>I disagree. Polite nonsenses don't make a higher level of discourse.

>
> Civility and intelligence in discourse are independent; you have
> drawn a false dichotomy. Notice how I am able to rebut what
> you have said without calling you an idiot. If I had, in fact,
> referred to you with an insulting name, my abusive language
> would have distracted from my actual point, rather than
> strengthened it.

Marshall, had you called him an idiot, it would have been demonstrably untrue. The inherent anti-empiricism would have undermined your argument.

Several individuals are selling snake oil in this newsgroup, and that snake oil can cause harm. Exposing charlatanism is a public service and a civic duty. Your willful blindness and obstructionism are rude to every newbie who is damaged by your failure to speak up.

> In fact, the level of intelligence in this group is what it is;
> abusive language doesn't raise or lower it. All that abusive
> language can do is to make it a less pleasant place to be.

For you, perhaps. The self-aggrandizing ignorants and those who coddle them make it a much less pleasant place for me. I suppose, if the newsgroup serves solely to stroke your ego, then having a bunch of stupid ignorants eating up bandwidth is a good thing. I couldn't care any less about your ego, though.

> How is that a worthy goal?

Yes, please answer: How is making the forum less pleasant for me a worthy goal? How is harming the innocent a worthy goal? Received on Wed Apr 19 2006 - 14:18:30 CDT