Re: Objects and Relations

On Thu, 01 Feb 2007 02:26:23 GMT, Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca> wrote:

>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.

Ok, chaps; in that (those) context(s) I agree. Make the effort, do the thinking, come to a (wrong) conclusion and share it; that's ok.

Take a cursory glance and conclude that x and y are so and z is not; that's not OK.

Umm ... thought I had a point to make; guess I should take my own advice and STFU :)

Lemming

-- 
Curiosity *may* have killed Schrodinger's cat.