Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

what just happened

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

What just happened is that I deleted approximately 7 messages from 3 CHA

members. I have

them stored if we need to retieve them if someone can convince me that it is

necessary.

Why? I love a spirited discussion and I found nothing in them that was

particularily

scandelous nor libelous. However, there were comments within them that are best

directed in

personal emails and will gain nothing by being on a public forum. In short,

there was no way

this exchange was going to go anywhere except into personalities.

I assume that a lot of these posts were seen by the parties involved as well as

some of the

rest of us. For those who missed it it was an exchange prompted by a post by Bob

Felt which

remains posted and then several exhanges from others. I believe all posts had

valid and vital

points to make but also contain angry tones that could only further digress.

What I can do... If all parties would agree then I would like to edit the posts

in a way that

others can join in the discussion without stepping between warring parties and

the passions

will be directed at the issues not at the personalities.

If this is not acceptable to the posters then I suggest you try to repost. I

think you

understand the parameters I am trying to maintain here. Again, I have no

interest in shutting

you guys up, you are welcome to go at this off-list and I assign no blame.

I have utter respect for all of you but lets discuss the issues.

love,

doug

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

I've read this list for a few years. It's meaningful

to me. I don't contribute often because I don't have

much meaningful to say. I think you did a disservice

by deleting any content or messages regarding the

translation debate. I think these are healthy

" personalities " engaged in a debate that affects all

of us, and I request that you do not manipulate by

editing content. This discussion is particularly

valueable to those of us who teach. I've learned more

from Eric Brand's posts than in many textbooks, and

there are many points in Jason's posts that I agree

with, so please let the discussion continue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Doug,

 

Since I don't think any of my posts were among the deleted, I have no

personal axe to grind about those deletions. However, I do question

the idea that debate should not/cannot include ad hominem arguments.

Please note I did not say ad hominem " attacks. " Name-calling is an

attack. However, pointing out the possible underlying reasons a person

may be holding the opinions they are may very well be germane to a

larger understanding of the debate. As I have written before on this

list, many professional communication gurus say all opinions

ultimately are emotional biases rooted in the personality of the one

who holds them and that all " evidence " for those opinions are merely

rationalizations. If this is true (as my experience suggests it is to

me), then it also seems to me that all debate eventually comes back to

the biographies and personalities of those who are debating. On the

one hand, the debate is not likely to change the minds of the debaters

themselves. On the other, the debate may help clarify the minds of

those listening who may not have such strongly held preconceptions.

What I mean here is that the debate may be most valuable to those who

are merely listening and not actually taking place in it. Thus to stop

a debate because it has become " personal " may deprive those listeners

of vital information for judging what they are hearing/reading.

 

Just something to consider.

 

Bob

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Hi All,

 

I think debates are definately educational. I have to agree with Doug, that

getting angry doesn't lead to more of the same. What could be helpful is to

state things, ...... " In my experience.... " format, that keeps the ideas flowing

and avoiding the bigger banging that can start to develop.

 

However, a warning could have sufficed.

 

It has been pointed out to me, that the word 'discussion' has the sub term in it

'cussion' which means to strike. And I believe it is a good source word.

Dialogue on the other hand, as in it, a shared river of ideas flowing between

two people and the words and ideas flow between them to clarify the world view

on a subject. Discussions and debates polarize an issue and that is where we

start to miss the yin and yanging and turn to black and white.

 

Maybe this is useful as an insight, maybe not. It is just what I think.

 

Sincerely,

Rozz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Bob, these are interesting ideas. I would reframe it by saying that people are

motivated by

their " self-interests " and in the best of times by " enlightened self-interest "

which

encompasses the group or situation so that all may have a satisfactory outcome.

I've been

around these internet boards long enough to hear the tones of a debate and when

they are

useful and when they aren't and when they are best expressed in private emails

between

the individual parties.

doug

 

 

, " Bob Flaws " <pemachophel2001

wrote:

>

> Doug,

>

> Since I don't think any of my posts were among the deleted, I have no

> personal axe to grind about those deletions. However, I do question

> the idea that debate should not/cannot include ad hominem arguments.

> Please note I did not say ad hominem " attacks. " Name-calling is an

> attack. However, pointing out the possible underlying reasons a person

> may be holding the opinions they are may very well be germane to a

> larger understanding of the debate. As I have written before on this

> list, many professional communication gurus say all opinions

> ultimately are emotional biases rooted in the personality of the one

> who holds them and that all " evidence " for those opinions are merely

> rationalizations. If this is true (as my experience suggests it is to

> me), then it also seems to me that all debate eventually comes back to

> the biographies and personalities of those who are debating. On the

> one hand, the debate is not likely to change the minds of the debaters

> themselves. On the other, the debate may help clarify the minds of

> those listening who may not have such strongly held preconceptions.

> What I mean here is that the debate may be most valuable to those who

> are merely listening and not actually taking place in it. Thus to stop

> a debate because it has become " personal " may deprive those listeners

> of vital information for judging what they are hearing/reading.

>

> Just something to consider.

>

> Bob

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...