Singled out

Dancing is most impressive at this stage of your pregnancy.  Waddling did you say? 

As for a hijack, previous comments have pretty much dealt with the OP and moved on.

EVERYBODY - Get off your bar stools and dance with Cheeky.  Don't want to 'single her out'.  (See how I brought it back on topic.)

Quote from: Stil on September 23, 2008, 03:52:53 AM

but attacking ideas can make some people feel as if they are being attacked personally.

This sounds very Chinese!  Attack my government = attack me, attack my ideas = attack me.  The torch relay was a classic in this line of thinking, as is discussing things like '5000 years of culture'. 

It's true though.  Some people naturally personalise their ideas.  And in so doing are part of the process that invents "value."  Not just true or false, but valuable and moral.  It all does come down to true and false in the end, but valuable and not-valuable are important layers of meaning for comparing truths.  If people didn't personalise stuff at least sometimes, would there be anything left to recognise as valuable?  Even "true" and "false" are valueless if you don't have some personal relationship to them.  The hard-nosed thinkers, the ones who can step back from their emotional involvement in a given issue, aren't really all that hard-nosed--it's just that their strongest emotional investment--truth, or community, or learning, or whatever their hard-nosed thinking is meant finally to aid--isn't directly attacked in common argument.

And then there's people who don't really want any kind of attack on ideas, and for them it's dull and tiresome, because they already know where their sense of right and wrong comes from: tradition.  And tradition is largely something one doesn't question.

I grant you, people who take every disagreement personally and people who have their answers already mapped out by their ancestors make uninspiring interlocutors, unless one is really fond of endless reminiscence or constant self-questioning, but put everyone together and it seems you've got a big system of checks and balances curbing the excesses of any one approach to understanding the world around one.

So... respect.  Yeah, I know, how "blah" is that!  It's traditional to observe that respect for differing views is good.  Personally, I think dynamic respect is better than plain vanilla respect.  Straight respect is a bit too strict and doesn't let you run up on other people's lawns and egg their windows.  Dynamic respect is better.  One can on occasion ring someone's doorbell and run away if one allows that someone else is on their way to your place with toilet paper.  After a while all the razzing will settle down into something respectable.  (Assuming of course that people generally aren't so wedded to their own practice that they will always fail to see any value in a different approach.)

That's presumably the value of diversity: everyone should from time to time let one of their large and valuable number go off the deep end and rant and rave and struggle because somewhere in their foaming nonsense there's an important gem that everyone else has overlooked.  Or there might be, anyway.  If they get too rude, of course, use the firehose, but, you know... go through their pockets too because there might be something in there.

Ok I kinda did a closing dance. I am not repeating it again 

Quote from: Lotus Eater on September 23, 2008, 06:13:18 AM

This sounds very Chinese!

that good or bad Lotus?

Depends on how you view the Chinese system of thinking. If you think it is a good process, then it's good.  If you think it doesn't allow for discussion, analysis, new views, challenges and you believe those things are good, then it is bad.  So - it depends.

Quote
Knowingly pushing people's buttons is an interesting one.  This means that there
a series of topics that are totally off-limits for discussion.
Oh yes that's exactly what it means   duh

  Ahh.. a nice out of context quote!    The next part was the consequences of this - that we all have 'no go areas' and add each of them up - then we have VERY little left that is OK to discuss.

Quote
We should be able to practice what we preach to our students

I'm not your student and I'm not talking to you in person. There is a difference Lotus.

For example. A student may hang on your every word and idea. I just really couldn't give a rat's ass.

Ahh.. almost a personal attack .. interesting.  If our students are hanging on our every word we are failing as teachers of thinking and analysis. The point again was missed - if we believe that part of our job is to teach thinking along with vocab, analysis along with grammar, then if we ourselves cannot accept this applied to our own ideas, we should NOT be kidding ourselves we are capable of teaching this.

We do not need to be there in person.  Much analysis, critical thinking etc is done alone, with our reading, our researching, our marking.  If we can't analyse and respond to written material, how do we teach our students to research? 

Quote from CP:

And in so doing are part of the process that invents "value."  Not just true or false, but valuable and moral.  It all does come down to true and false in the end, but valuable and not-valuable are important layers of meaning for comparing truths.

  And this is where we need the most discussion - because what is valuable and moral for one person (ie Sarah Palin or the Pope) can be dangerous and destructive for other people or countries.

Respect for the person is demonstrated by taking their ideas seriously enough to research, to discuss alternate views.  Dis-respect comes in the name calling, the personal attacks or the feeling/implication that another person is not capable of participating actively in a serious discussion.

Quote from: Lotus Eater on September 23, 2008, 06:13:18 AM

Quote from: Stil on September 23, 2008, 03:52:53 AM

but attacking ideas can make some people feel as if they are being attacked personally.

This sounds very Chinese!  Attack my government = attack me, attack my ideas = attack me.  The torch relay was a classic in this line of thinking, as is discussing things like '5000 years of culture'. 

It's true though.  Some people naturally personalise their ideas.  And in so doing are part of the process that invents "value."  Not just true or false, but valuable and moral.  It all does come down to true and false in the end, but valuable and not-valuable are important layers of meaning for comparing truths.  If people didn't personalise stuff at least sometimes, would there be anything left to recognise as valuable?  Even "true" and "false" are valueless if you don't have some personal relationship to them.  The hard-nosed thinkers, the ones who can step back from their emotional involvement in a given issue, aren't really all that hard-nosed--it's just that their strongest emotional investment--truth, or community, or learning, or whatever their hard-nosed thinking is meant finally to aid--isn't directly attacked in common argument.

 True CP...but I view this as a form of insecurity. Some people seem to have so little sense of self that the sole thing they have to define themselves are their values and belief systems. Sad, really.

 I'm all for a good debate, but I have my limits. I've come across a number of people who can spout on for days...weeks even, until they are satisfied they have proved their point. Me...I got better things to do.

True CP...but I view this as a form of insecurity. Some people seem to have so little sense of self that the sole thing they have to define themselves are their values and belief systems. Sad, really.

Yeah, and they can be wearisome to talk with, but... if they really are into getting their sense of self by personalising everything that comes their way and they question their own worth because of it, then after some time they're going to come up with some truly impressive insights into value and meaning--boring, tiresome sadsacks unable to lighten up though they may be.  Who else would undertake the task with such grinding relentlessness?  Everyone does it to some degree.  Some people make a career of it.

So, then, for example, you add in some force of nature person, someone who relentlessly organises practical things without a single offhand thought to the human cost, and it's a Deathmatch or it's a productive collaboration that yields something great neither could so easily accomplish alone.

Respect for the person is demonstrated by taking their ideas seriously enough to research, to discuss alternate views. 

I must dig to beffer:  respect for the ideas is demonstrated by research and so on; respect for the person in demonstrated by admitting--grudgingly perhaps, and with teeth gritted--their right to their own way of valuing things.

Dis-respect comes in the name calling, the personal attacks or the feeling/implication that another person is not capable of participating actively in a serious discussion.

And I think I must now announce a first position I take in pretty much any thought process:  "People?!  They're the worst.  So full of icky feelings and personal crap--my god!  Can they count past ten with their shoes on?"

But I digress...

Me ... I'm still worried about the pecker in the pocket.  Reach in to find your keys or money and encounter a pecker.... very scary process.  And what happens if it falls out when you pull out your hanky?  Do you pick it up out of the Chinese dirt and pop it back in your pocket?  How long will it last before it begins to ... smell?

Please - just say NO to the pecker pocketing people.

I know it's  but what the heck???

can't leave you kids alone for a day without watching my back... 

commies are cooooool in my book.. one session dancing with Cheekygal would convince even ol' Mc Carthy were he still around 

LE, it's a tricky pecker which is why it needs holding... can't be trusted... but oh so fun.. 

now y'all, meet my old friend and guest at the saloon for a few days:


chop chop... chop chop..

Thanks for the effort to get this one friendlier again. But I'd already been driven to needing to say something, and had spent too long on it before I saw new posts...

We've been seeing why the "good strong discussions" get segregated into this woodpile. I wish we didn't have to have this place at all; it's here because some of our esteemed members are apparently unable to restrain themselves from launching into them. I sure wish they wouldn't. But they do.

I don't want this kind of stuff here much, because, as we've seen all too often:

1) For too many people, "attack my ideas/beliefs" equals "attack me personally". Such people, it seems, can't have a "good strong discussion" about anything substantial without going incendiary.

2) Some of us have the opposite polarity: they can't just express an opposing idea, they have to openly insinuate what an underqualified moronic asshole the other poster is as well. Again: such people are simply not capable of sustaining a "good strong discussion" that remains friendly and respectful.

3) Some of us, and no real need to name names here, have the approach of "Oh, disagree with me, will you? Well, I'll just pick up this club and I'll bash and bash and bash and keep bashing until the other viewpoint crawls away into oblivion and only my opinion remains. Damn, I'm good!"
Well, guess what: This approach doesn't just drive away ideas, it drives away MEMBERS. I had another one probably down the hatch this morning; thanks so much.

4) "Pushing people's buttons" DOESN'T mean "stating ideas"...it means saying things for the express purpose of getting a rise out of people. When done the wrong way, it seriously sucks ass. Boo, hiss.

Ladies and gentlemen: THIS IS A FORUM ABOUT CHINA.
I've been saying this for 5 long years, but some of us remain hopelessly unclear on this concept.
It's a China forum. Why do we have to keep coming back to these endless horrible discussions about religious beliefs and partisan political views in this place? Why is this horseshit continually inflicted upon us? Why must we choose this venue to talk about Sarah Palin or The Pope (or their love-child ) when there are so many other places that WANT and WELCOME these discussions? WE DO NOT WANT OR WELCOME THEM! Especially not if they can't happen without turning ugly...and apparently they can't, even here on what's supposed to be the Friendly Place, the alternative to the repulsive mosh pits found at Dave's ESL Cafe and elsewhere.
(By the way...the Palin thread started out perfectly innocently and was fun. It just got mangled beyond recognition by later posts...)

There are lots and lots of forums about religious beliefs and partisan political views. If you want to talk about those things, GO THERE. Not here. There. If you want to talk about China, come here.
Why is this idea so difficult to grasp?

Folks, I HATE to censor...edit or delete posts, disable membership accounts, and so forth. I really do...it literally pains me to have to do these things.
But one thing I CAN promise you: the Saloon is NOT going to be turned into a politico-religious ThunderDome, or a convenient ego-polishing stand for some of our members. Not as long as I can get to a keyboard. I will CLOSE THE PLACE DOWN, or anything short of that I have to do, rather than see that happen.

I am physically ill over the tone in this place right now. It needs to sweeten up and re-focus on China PDQ or I'm going to re-enact Jack Nicholson's classic scene in The Shining.

Heeere's Johnny!

But I heard that Sarah Palin had a love child with a Chinese guy.
 

Oh EL  you have to first join CIS and FBI. Then after a tough training from both sides, you should not consider who pays more but it is a matter of simple patriotism. So eventually you betray CIS to FBI and FBI to KGB. Then you are caught and tortured by all 3 agencies and then they might, just MIGHT consider you passed.

(that only applies to outsiders  )

Coooool!  Can you write me a recommendation letter for my application to the FBI?   



EDIT:  Oh wow!  My 400th post.