2011
03.23
03.23
Blogs are rarely a conducive medium for thoughtful discussions. (I do, however, think this blog’s discussions fare better than most.) The following diagram should serve as a general guide for how rational human beings exchange ideas:
Another instructive suggestion: Don’t be a dick.
Online discussions, especially those that concern sensitive issues like religion, are difficult to have. But if we’re civil and amenable to argument, such discussions aren’t futile.
I’ve invited several people to write guest posts for this blog, and they’ll likely be published over the next few weeks. Please show them the same respect you’ve afforded my posts.
I think a few more boxes could be added and a few others tweaked, but even as this now stands, I am going to have to get it made into a door poster, a towel, a t shirt, a knicknack, a bookmark, a fridge magnet, and fresco on the side of my house.
I agree. It’s not a perfect guide to discussion, but I like the general idea.
Jon Adams’s reasoning reminds me of what Shakespeare wrote:
“Out, out brief candle…! Life’s but a walking shadow; a poor player that struts and frets his hour upon the stage, and then is heard no more… A tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing…!
Well Jon, your hour is now. Enjoy it while you can, ’cause that’s all you got–and there ain’t no more for you… Or as all you college geniuses would say: “Dig it dude…!”
How is your comment relevant to this post?
It is relevant inasmuch as your complicated little diagram is a blueprint for prevarication. You’ve learned a lot from Obama, Biden, et. al… Keep working at it. You’ll get it someday…
Shakespeare was more eloquent than you (or I) will ever be. Re-read his words: “A tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing…”
Explain what is so objectionable about this post, Harland?
When reading any blog related to SHAFT, I am reminded of the old kids’ trick when flipping a coin to make a decision. “Heads, I win–Tails you lose…!” (That would be you doing the flipping.) I’m a Mormon, but not too diplomatic to tell someone when I believe his opinion is way out in left field. If you have a little trouble understanding what I am saying, why don’t you go on the internet and look up the definition of “prevarication”. It’s just a little gentler than openly telling someone that it is hard to imagine that he even believes his own words… I believe there is a five-letter word for that, but I won’t use it…!
Care to give me an example of prevarication?
Let’s just dispense with all the charged language; terms, like “paranoia”, “fearmongering”, “meaningful dialogue,” “hate-speech,” “gay rights,” etc., ad infinitum, ad nauseum…. I know that’s asking a lot, since that is your stock in trade, and the only way you know how to spread your propoganda. Gee, that’s another word you might want to investigate… But I suspect you probably know more about it than I do…
How about I just close off our communication with a cleaner (well, maybe that’s not the right word…!), more concise, more undertsandable two-syllable definition of “prevarication” than what you’ll find on the internet: bull-shit…
‘Bye, y’all…! It’s been fun interacting…!
Right, because “meaningful dialogue” and “gay rights” are charged terms…
Take care.
The terms and their precise definitions are debatable, sure, but when have I ever discouraged debate at this blog? If you’ve felt excluded from the discussions, it’s because you’ve never made an effort to respectfully engage people.
You oughta know…They’re yours, NOT mine…!