Theos-Talk Archives (January 1997 Message tl00325)

On Sat, 11 Jan 1997, Eldon B. Tucker wrote:
> 
> If it were only a brilliant expression of ideas, no one would object, even
> if they did not agree. In a discussion group, if you don't like what someone
> is saying, and you were to walk up to them, grab them by their shirt and
> pull them out of their chair, call them a puny little illogical fool with
> vile motives and give an icy laugh in their face, and some in the group
> started to clap and cheer, what would you think? There's something quite
> wrong, apart from how brilliantly either argument was going on. 
	Something would be wrong. However, as a means of responding to
someone else who has, either overtly or by implication, begun such a
scene, it is one (certainly not the only, but one) means of facing the
situation. Look at this previous paragraph - you never mention me by name,
and state a concept in terms of a very innocent universal principle,
no "personal attack" here, but does anyone doubt you are referring here
to *me*? And if in response I address you personally, will I then be
accused of grabbing you by the shirt?
> 
> In my previous posting, I was pointing out the adverse side effects of
> such an approach, since JRC may not be fully aware of how this appears.
> If you seen no harm in it, and understand why personal attacks would be
> valuable, perhaps you can explain it so that I can understand.
	I doubt anyone can explain it so that you will understand it. I
explained ... in fairly measured tones ... to that post, explaining a bit
of the perspective from which I work. Either you did not understand it, or
(more likely) simply don't agree with it. How things *appear* make little
difference to me. And I'm kinda suprised you posted that - I thought we
have reached some state of acceptance of one another. That I don't accept
your personal perception of what I'm doing as objective truth should be no
suprise. You've told me before how you judge my communication style. As
I've told you that I consider your tone of "teaching the unaware masses"
somewhat condescending. I hope you don't wish to re-argue this. 

Once again, I am fully aware of what I'm doing, and more than that,
understand that from within the worldview you use to judge my actions, you
will continually find them not meeting your standards - but from my
perspective you often seem to generalize your own personal conceptions
into universal standards, and I neither accept those standards nor am
concerned with meeting them. Just as you have shown no intention
whatsoever to alter your behaviour or presentation because of my opinions.
But do you really want to have this conversation again?
							Regards, -JRC