----- Original Message -----
From: Elizabeth F Campion
To: UnivCity@list.purple.com
Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2007 5:56 PM
Subject: Re: [UC] The way he should have handled it, were he not playing CYA
so desperately
Is this a
"When did you stop beating your kid?" question?
Or just a continuation of a trend that asks a distracting question that
insures that the "guilt" of the person or people who irritate the asker is a
'given', and...
... that the irritators are presumed "blame"-able for something?
... a reminder that the irratatees have a tight little clique and are reading
from a similar script.
Liz
On Sun, 15 Jul 2007 12:41:18 EDT [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So, Al, are you saying that the Philadelphia candidate, Tom Knox, should
have taken the blame for having John Fenton help out with his political rally?
Melani Lamond
Liz,
You really understand what is going on here. And you see this "clique"
strategy. Most often, I’ve noticed that it is the group straw man that is used
and becomes so intimidating. It becomes one of the biggest causes of the list
incivility. I’m glad you publicly and accurately questioned this post.
I need to always ask are these uses of fallacious arguments really based on
extremely poor reading comprehension? Or is this something much more
problematic? Are these strategies actually intentional attempts to dishonestly
obfuscate important issues and destroy any chance for honest discussion?
Anwser: YES
Should they be condemned as mean and a huge original source of incivility?
I think civility does not come with fake politeness. Civility requires an
ingenuous attempt at communication by the players.
When the first person on the list does the "misreading" of someone’s
opinion or question, and then another 5 join in the mistake with angry
insulting posts; our neighbors who rarely post must be incredibly intimidated.
Once we all see the pattern, we can see how mean, destructive, and dishonest
the actors are being. Those who engage in these strategies do risk being
exposed at a later time, but for a time on this list any outside reader saw
"the gang" getting away with this behavior. It was "the free pass" discussed a
few months ago.
I was very confused at folks for harshly criticizing some of my clear
fictions because the imagery was crass while remaining silent to the big
obvious destructiveness going on simultaneously. A fiction or satire is an
attempt to make the reader think for him or herself and come to their own
conclusions of the writer's position.
By its clear fictional nature, an honest fictional effort cannot be used
like the pretense of a non-fictional but actually fallacious argument or
straight out lie. It cannot be as destructive as the deliberate attempt to
deceive and intimidate with these fallacious strategies. Constructing obvious
fiction is always honest, and non-fiction is often fiction that we sometimes
call propaganda or lies.
These mean strategies are designed to make a fool of the target, but once
exposed, as you clearly understand; they have actually made fools of the
writers. It is my opinion, that it becomes very important to challenge these
posts.
If someone seems to honestly make a misreading, I think it would be mean to
respond harshly instead of trying to help clarify. But I assert the right to
use any literary device and the right to pull out all literary stops against
those using these tactics deliberately. It is an important way to stand up for
free speech.
If our neighbors are intimidated from participation on this public
communication vehicle, aren't their free speech rights being harmed by their
neighbors with this intimidation????
The question should always be the same to the gang. Are you really stupid
with a pathetic level of reading comprehension? Or are you trying to be a
dishonest bully to confuse and intimidate; and win your position by silencing
discussion? These strategies are used by those whose positions can't be backed
up by asserting ethical principals.
That is why some folks can only resort to these tactics because they know
they can't carry their arguments in a fair and honest debate!
I have a thick skin because I understood the pattern before joining the
list. The first time a person is victimized with this; it gives a horrible
feeling and it made me very sad to accept that my neighbors could go so low.
Then, I think it can make many normal humans angry.
You probably know that you are now a target. At the same time, Liz, taking
a courageous position is not only the best ethical decision; it is the best
decision for our spiritual well being. The importance of that can’t compare
with any pain these folks temporarily dish out.
Thanks and have a great day,
Glenn
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.476 / Virus Database: 269.10.6/900 - Release Date: 7/14/2007
3:36 PM
