Re: Objects and Relations
From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 02:26:23 GMT
Message-ID: <jdcwh.691$R71.10406_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
>>Lemming <thiswillbounce_at_bumblbee.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 13:29:18 -0800, Gene Wirchenko <genew_at_ocis.net>
>>>wrote:
>>
>>>> Why make statements that you have to retract?
>>>
>>>I quite often make statements I *might* have to retract in the light
>>>of new information. I do so knowingly and without worrying about
>>>whether the statement will turn out to be false. Getting things wrong
>>>is, IMFO, the best way to learn - it's certainly served me well over
>>>the years. And since I have no fear of exposing my ignorance - and
>>>the process of my education - to others, I see no harm in making such
>>>statements.
>>
>> My statement was in the context of the manner of the statements.
>>Example: Why be rude and end up having to apologise when not being
>>rude will almost always work out better in the long run? It is easy
>>enough to be wrong, so why work at it?
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 02:26:23 GMT
Message-ID: <jdcwh.691$R71.10406_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
Gene Wirchenko wrote:
> Gene Wirchenko <genew_at_ocis.net> wrote: > >
>>Lemming <thiswillbounce_at_bumblbee.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 13:29:18 -0800, Gene Wirchenko <genew_at_ocis.net>
>>>wrote:
>>
>>>> Why make statements that you have to retract?
>>>
>>>I quite often make statements I *might* have to retract in the light
>>>of new information. I do so knowingly and without worrying about
>>>whether the statement will turn out to be false. Getting things wrong
>>>is, IMFO, the best way to learn - it's certainly served me well over
>>>the years. And since I have no fear of exposing my ignorance - and
>>>the process of my education - to others, I see no harm in making such
>>>statements.
>>
>> My statement was in the context of the manner of the statements.
>>Example: Why be rude and end up having to apologise when not being
>>rude will almost always work out better in the long run? It is easy
>>enough to be wrong, so why work at it?
> > That came out too harsh. The basic idea is why knowingly do > something wrong instead of taking the time to get it right? Not that > I am perfect in this, but I try.
Anything worth doing is worth doing poorly. Making mistakes is not a problem. Showing up without having made a lick of effort to learn the basics and then making overconfident (and absurd) assertions is self-indulgent. Received on Thu Feb 01 2007 - 03:26:23 CET