You raise some good points...

Post #18,838 by inthane-chan 11/19/01 3:37:58 PM Reply	You raise some good points... ...and unfortunately, some that I don't have time to handle properly right now. Yeah, I know I don't cite much. Problem is mainly due to time - As a full time worker/college student, this is pretty much my sole "entertainment" source lately. Maybe in about a year, when I'm done with college, I'll have more time to go digging through different sites looking for articles to back up my position. My comment about getting 2-3 hours of sleep a night for the past two weeks is unfortunately too accurate, and I wish it was due to something enjoyable. I agree that you post a lot more "raw data points" than others in the form of newslinks - but I've also seen you grab one sentence out of a whole paragraph that somebody else cites, then dismiss the rest as an "incoherent rant" without explaining WHY you think its an "incoherent rant." IIRC, in formal logic studies, there's a specific name for that kind of fallacy, but it doesn't come to mind at present. I'll also admit that it's possible I missed seeing you admit that you've been in error. I can't recall ever seeing such a post, but I'll admit the possibility. If you want to point it out to me, fine, if not, I'll take your word as a man of honor. Oddly enough, I do respect you as somebody who at least stands behind what they say. A lot more than can be said for one other person who didn't respond to a certain chess challenge a bit back... (No, not the two of you who are currently playing me - in fact, I wasn't the challenger...) As far as the "blaming others for not letting you win" bit - I mentioned merely that you and I have incompatible .dll structures, and that from my viewpoint, you don't appear to have room to admit that other possible .dll structures exist. I probably did overstep that a bit - like all dogmas, (including my own!) they cannot accept the existence of a dogma that is not subservient to their own. I'd like to improve my debate skills, I'm just realizing that right now, it's counterproductive for me to worry about debate when I've got homework. :) I keep bouncing into arguments when my emotions get the better of me, and then bounce out when I realize I've got 1k lines of code due the next morning, which does give kind of a scattered appearance. :( Sorry if I've given the impression that I'm blaming you for my inability to debate. I think the largest disconnect between you and me, however, comes on a philosophical level - we seem to disagree on a pretty deep level exactly what we should and should not do in response to recent world events. You might be surprised, if I ever ran off at the mouth, just what I would be willing to do in order to put an end to this threat once and for all, just as I have expressed my surprise at the actions you seem willing to do. In the end, however, we are ultimately on the same side - we do not wish to have threats to civilization wandering around Out There. Barbarians at the Gate, et al. For now, I'll TRY to stop firing blanks into the crouds... And just chuck a few grenades when I find live ones. "He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Post #18,876 by marlowe 11/19/01 7:48:15 PM 11/19/01 9:17:54 PM Reply	Okay, fair enough. I know what insomnia is like. But I'd forgotten you were a sufferer. I'd have been a lot less confrontational otherwise. Apologies and regrets for that. As for time pressure, I have a different way of dealing with that. I choose subjects where the facts are readily at hand, and pass on discussions of other topics. But a couple of points: 1. This is a topic where data points can be had just by perusing the news and commentary sites, then perhaps following up with Google. It's a bit exceptional in that regard, but there it is. 2. I only call something incoherent if it does not, in fact, cohere. Bad sentence structure, excessive use of glittering generalizations, a smokescreen of emotionally freighted adjectives, and the repeated failure to link conclusion to premise in any fashion, all are symptoms of a lack of coherency. And when any or all these things are in abundant evidence, I say "incoherent rant" because that's precisely what it is. To ask one to explain "why this is an incoherent rant" is like insisting on an explanation of why two plus two must equal four, or just what basis has someone got for telling you that your fly is unzipped. The obvious is not only factual in itself, but is a starting point to finding the non-obvious truths. If you can't admit and acknowledge the obvious, how can you ever get anywhere in the neighborhood of truth? [link\|http://www.angelfire.com/ca3/marlowe/index.html\|http://www.angelfir...e/index.html] Sometimes "tolerance" is just a word for not dealing with things. Edited by marlowe Nov. 19, 2001, 09:17:54 PM EST Expand All History
Post #18,878 by Ashton 11/19/01 8:23:24 PM Reply	Sorry but.. (again) Most 'issues' worth discussing at all - are rarely solvable via some succession of Authorized-facts or their little cousins, factoids. You might wish it otherwise (and it seems - you do). Neither Google nor the Library of Congress possess sufficient Facts to solve most homo-sap problems du jour. For just one Factual Example: attribution of 'motive' is basic to our sysetem of 'justice' (another Duesy of a notion in its very concept). Now Shakespeare has given us a rich source of possible remedies - with nary a Fact being required - all one needs is to acquire Wisdom ;-) Facts can.. settle some issues of time, place - and possible motive. But where human behavior is the 'issue' -- facts have damn little to do with events, except afterwards: is it a fact that such and such occurred. More examples? Start with Rashomon for a primer. IMhO - it doesn't matter if your self-bestowed Logic Skills\ufffd are real or imagined factoids. Your view appears to be about duelling Facts and not about (as my Mater used to say) arriving at the truth of matters through discussion, or so it appears. The Doberman Pinscher School of assertion? OK in a dogfight. If ya like discussing philosophy with dogs? Oh Alpha Male. Ashton Woof!
Post #18,887 by marlowe 11/19/01 9:15:49 PM Reply	If you don't much care for facts... I wonder if you have an alternative in mind? You can't have a discussion without something to discuss. Are you suggesting we discuss mere opinions? Opinions are meaningless in a vacuum. Yes, mine too. [link\|http://www.angelfire.com/ca3/marlowe/index.html\|http://www.angelfir...e/index.html] Sometimes "tolerance" is just a word for not dealing with things.
Post #18,900 by Ashton 11/19/01 11:39:24 PM Reply	Facts are important too, in issues - especially where there are contradictory versions. But once an issue is defined, then next, most often what is needed - is some insight into the issue. Often that is about - what homo-saps often do in ____ situations. Offhand I see little place for further facts at that stage - and damn little about Winning, either. Thus I don't understand your preoccupation with facts - since no one ever could hear all of those; we always decide upon ~insufficient data. Or never decide at all. A.

Welcome to IWETHEY!