Subject:
|
Re: I've said enough...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 26 Jan 2001 21:25:39 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
207 times
|
| |
|
|
(Note: I'm not debating in this post)
David Eaton wrote:
>
> Honestly, I don't think that at all. What do I think? I think this is a
> phenomenally hard topic for a lot of people.
Well you're sort of right and sort of not. My problem with this
particular debate is my lack of debate experience coupled with my lack
of scientific training. To be truthful, however, I have studied the
debate itself as an observer lots of times from an outside angle.
> No. I think it's more likely that you can't quite find exactly the words
> you'd need to do so, and you aren't used to thinking about the issues the
> way that we're doing here. It's tough. And I appreciate the effort on your
> part. However, I do think you'll need more practice at it... heck, that's
> why some of us are debating it to begin with :)
It is true that I don't have the same experience in debating as
proba\bly most of you do, but I do have (I should say did have)
responses to most of the questions that I didn't respond to - it was
just taking more time than I initially anticipated as I quickly realised
that I had to confirm many of my responses in my own mind for accuracy
(although there was much debate on the credability of my sources)
> If you're really getting stressed about it, all I can say is you're taking
> it too seriously.
Actually I'm pretty sure that it wasn't the topic of the debate that I
was struggling with (if you only knew how much I've been fighting myself
all day to NOT reply to some of the messages directed towards me) it was
the time factor that it was reuiring.
> If you do decide to keep at it, just try and sit down and
> take it step at a time, sentence by sentence, thought by thought, and really
> try and figure out what the deeper issues are. Find out the true root of
> your argument, and the root of the other person's. And if you find it, voice
> it, and people still don't get it, try re-stating it a few times. And if
> THEY still don't get it, try not to get frustrated.
Well actually I was doing that and it was taking way too much time. As
I originally mentioned I think everyone would fare better if somehow the
debate could be moderated.
> And something else on that note-- although this discussion can be quite
> invigorating, don't let it take over your life. I think Steve Chapelle has
> been handling this very well with respect to his own self. If he's busy at
> work, busy at home, or just has too much going on to participate, he doesn't
> post. It's just a debate. Others of us (Jon, myself, Dave!, etc) are posting
> quite frequently-- but just because we do so doesn't make us any more or
> less right.
I agree....the problem was I was listening to my reaction impulse
instead of my other senses (like food - by the time I finished last
night I was STARVING!)
> Quite true. It's a matter of trying to get to the root of the issues. When I
> get to the point at which sheer preference dictates the opinions presented
> without logical recourse, it's time to throw in the towel. And likewise if
> you can't seem to get to that level no matter how hard you try. If someone
> doesn't get it, don't kill yourself trying to get your point across.
....the problem is my opponent who happens to have just enough more
mental endurance (or who has no other life) then proceeds to accuse me
of dodging their question...which moderation would fix by not letting
the "last word" syndrome to exist.
> I apologize if I contributed to your frustration, and I'm rather sure I
> have, considering one of my more recent posts. And for what it's worth, I'm
> sorry for being harsh. As I'm sure you're aware, emotions are quickly drawn
> into this kind of a debate, and I should know better than to involve them.
> It is my hope, however, that you can get by them, and try not to take
> anything here too personally.
No need to apologize....getting frustrated is nobody's fault but my
own. In fact, if after reading all those messages last night I hadn't
decided to it back down 40 minutes later I might still be effectively
debating right now.
--
-TiM
NB, CA
http://echofx.itgo.com
t_c_c@yahoo.com
3ch0fx
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: I've said enough...
|
| (...) It's often very helpful to watch a debate before joining in, just to get a feel for the dynamics of the group, if not just the subject matter. And sometimes it's amazing how much it changes when you actually are the one who's in the limelight. (...) (24 years ago, 27-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: I've said enough...
|
| (...) Me either :^) (...) I think a lot of time is wasted disputing points (eg fossils) rather than more general arguments (eg whether scientific observation of Evolution is based on faith or theory). The misleading distortions of the Creationists (...) (24 years ago, 29-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: I've said enough...
|
| (...) Honestly, I don't think that at all. What do I think? I think this is a phenomenally hard topic for a lot of people. I'm used to it. So are a lot of the people here. Heck, that's why we post so much-- because we've had lots of practice at (...) (24 years ago, 26-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
10 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
