Guest guest Posted January 19, 2003 Report Share Posted January 19, 2003 thanks for bringing this stuff up.The one thing I've learned in the years of taking part in forums like these: It is very hard/impossible to judge the Tone of the posts. It seems especially to happen when a responder makes a bigger deal out of a small comment than the original writer intended. Or maybe that'show it seems... ;-)I think Rory's point is very good. Labeling an argument makes the whole debate less angry.doug>>>>I think taking the arguments less personally helps. After all this is just a discussion forum Alon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 19, 2003 Report Share Posted January 19, 2003 > thanks for bringing this stuff up. The one thing I've learned in the years of taking part in forums like these: It is very hard/impossible to judge the Tone of the posts. It seems especially to happen when a responder makes a bigger deal out of a small comment than the original writer intended. Or maybe that's how it seems... ;-) I think Rory's point is very good. Labeling an argument makes the whole debate less angry. doug > > -- > > On the whole I think you use this tactic well. However, it can > definitely cause problems in on-line discussions. When it's done in > person there are many cues to what is going on that are lacking in > email. For example, playing devil's advocate in person is usually > easily read by other debaters, who can then go along with the game to > the benefit of all. ...................I think if you use this tactic, you should make it abundantly > obvious that you are doing so. > > Rory > -- > > ______________________ > ______________________ > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 20, 2003 Report Share Posted January 20, 2003 , douglas wrote: > > I think Rory's point is very good. Labeling an argument makes the whole debate less angry. > doug > For example, playing devil's advocate in person is usually > > easily read by other debaters, who can then go along with the game to > > the benefit of all. ...................I think if you use this tactic, you should make it abundantly > > obvious that you are doing so. > > Maybe it would be enough to preface a statement with " Let me play devil's advocate " or " for the sake of argument " . but I wonder if people would listen if I did that. I like an argument to rest on its own laurels, not the fact that I feel strongly about it one way or another. I think the tendency is to assume people feel strongly about whatever they write. I wonder if an argument can still be polemic if one announces it as a polemic in advance. I'll have to chew on that one and I'll try to be bipolar in the meantime (get it? bipolar is the opposite of polemic). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 21, 2003 Report Share Posted January 21, 2003 At 7:10 AM +0000 1/21/03, < wrote: >I wonder if an argument can still be >polemic if one announces it as a polemic in advance. I'll have to >chew on that >one and I'll try to be bipolar in the meantime (get it? bipolar is >the opposite of >polemic). -- I'm not too sure of your definition of polemic. My understanding, (from the dictionary; OED), is that it means controversial discussion. You seem to be equating it with taking a deliberately extreme view which you don't actually ascribe to. Surely you can be polemical without pretending to a view you don't hold. If so, then while pretending to a view you don't hold may under some circumstances be polemical,they are not synonymous. OTOH, getting people to honestly respond by examining the assumptions behind their positions is difficult. For example, another tactic of discussion I've noticed is quite popular in this forum is that when asked for an explanation of reasoning on certain topics, the person asked will mostly ignore the questions and answer tangentially, or not at all, and then move back to a reassertion of their position. That makes any attempt to move a discussion forward pointless. I don't know whether signalling that you are playing devil's advocate would reduce it's effectiveness in teasing out the reasoning of others. Have you found it to be effective in this forum? Rory -- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 21, 2003 Report Share Posted January 21, 2003 , Rory Kerr <rorykerr@w...> wrote: > > I'm not too sure of your definition of polemic. My understanding, > (from the dictionary; OED), is that it means controversial > discussion. You seem to be equating it with taking a deliberately > extreme view which you don't actually ascribe to. Rory You are correct. What I have been doing is not polemical in the general sense of the term. It is more correctly a strategy used in polemics. Polemics is indeed the attack on a controversial subject. One strategy is to take the opposite view. I should also clarify that these are issues to which I do not " necessarily " . I don't think it is ever a matter of outright pretending. When one is on the debate club or in logic class, then you may actually practice pretending, but I never take the opposite view of a position I feel passionately about. No one has ever heard me argue against herb quality standards, but I have argued for and against the importance of learning chinese. Usually I am undecided and find flaws in the logic of one or more arguments. So for example, I was unsure of the utility of putting substantial emphasis on flavors, temps and entering channels of herbs in examinations of students. So I laid out the logical argument against this, while at the same time I began to experiment in my classes and clinic more with these as teaching tools. to my chagrin, as I have stated several times in the past, I found this to be extremely helpful. I still do not believe that the five flavors are immutable laws of nature, but that is hardly the issue here another tactic of > discussion I've noticed is quite popular in this forum is that when > asked for an explanation of reasoning on certain topics, the person > asked will mostly ignore the questions and answer tangentially, or > not at all, and then move back to a reassertion of their position. > That makes any attempt to move a discussion forward pointless. no doubt this is true and I also find it frustrating at times. But I think this is an example of trying to convince the jury not the adversary and I think it is a fair tactic, since the adversary is often dug in and will never change anyway. If replying might weaken your case, then sometimes it is better to remain silent and/or reassert your case, rather than respond to a critique point by point. I respond to such critiques when I feel they have actually weakened my case, but sometimes the comments do not need a response. My position is often already clear on many issues. However, if you feel that your question is not being addressed, you should point that out. It bothers me in a class when the question I ask is not the one that is answered, but I often find that the teacher is unaware of this tangential tendency in themselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 22, 2003 Report Share Posted January 22, 2003 At 6:29 PM +0000 1/21/03, < wrote: >If >replying might weaken your case, then sometimes it is better to remain silent >and/or reassert your case, rather than respond to a critique point by point. -- Of course, this tactic is most often used by those who have a weak case to begin with, and don't want that revealed by having it examined too closely. Rory -- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 2, 2004 Report Share Posted March 2, 2004 At 01:09 PM 3/2/04, you wrote: > I believe they >were/are affiliated with Sylla, no? I don't think so. Your source for superb Essential Oils, Aromatherapy Accessories, Information, Books and more! Visit us at: <http://www.naturesgift.com> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.