Reply
Fri 13 Feb, 2004 07:06 am
I have been noticing something recently. In certain threads, mainly in the religious and political categories, people apparently are having difficulty in discerning whether the thread is asking for a discussion or a debate.
What I am seeing, are people who are asking for thoughts, opinions and insights, and instead receiving adversarial confrontations.
Personally, I think that the confrontational tactic is counterproductive. IMO, I am here to learn, and to broaden my areas of knowledge, in a collegial atmosphere. It really ticks me off when an opinion is offered, only to be responded to by an attack, which in some cases is a hairsbreath away from being an ad hominem.
I am also disturbed by what I am seeing, especially on the Religion and Spirituality threads. We have a number of members, who apparently are highly religious, and want to discuss their religion. As a non-believer, I respectfully stay out of those threads. They are not asking to debate the tenets of their religion. They simply want to discuss their faith with like minded individuals. I become very angry when a member breaks into a thread, and aggressively challenges the member's beliefs.
I think that there IS a place for debate on A2K, and for challenging the values, ideas and insights of other people. I think that we are all intelligent enough to discern, by the nature of the thread, whether it is a debate or a discussion that is being solicited. I also think that ideas can be dissected, without dissecting a member.
What do you all think?
Discussion, debate.... diatribe. Dissention, disagreement, dueling...
Democracy? Doubtful.
Dozens desiring dialog dictatorship.
Well, what are the big differences between 'debate' and discussion?
(Ehem, I looked that up :wink: )
(The German term 'debate' usually refers to parlaments, but nomal people debate in discussions.)
Nevertheless, better debates and/or discussions than dialogues!
Walter Hinteler wrote:Nevertheless, better debates and/or discussions than dialogues!
Better dialogues than serial monologs.
Phoenix, I think personal attacks on any thread are worthless, but I agree that when a member interrupts a discussion/debate with fists flying, then nothing is accomplished, and I simply don't understand why some people here do it.
Letty wrote:... I simply don't understand why some people here do it.
Happens in the real world, too.
Don't I know that, Seal. I tried to discuss a subject of interest to me, with one of my friends. Her response was "NO"! I just sat there in stunned amazement.
SealPoet- Sadly, true. The difference is that we are a relatively small group, as compared with the rest of the immediate world. Do you think that it is unreasonable to expect that we hold ourselves to a higher standard of civility than the world at large?
Responses to attacks are not necessary. If some people are discussing the merits of let's say the use of Wheatables as communion wafers (just happen to have a box right here) and someone else breaks in with an attack on the idea, (the very idea!!) of communion, the orginal group need not respond. Just let the post sit there, frying in it's own juice.
That's the dumbest thing I have ever heard, Joe! Why don't you keep your ideas to yourself? What the hell are you doing here anyway -- trying to stir up trouble? And that avatar of yours. I bet you think it's pretty cool, don't you? I hate that shirt! And what's with the glasses? And another thing, I didn't particularly like the way you compared Wheatables to communion wafers!
I have my shoes with the bells on the toes ready to go.
Mr. Ratzenhofer
I and my mother are deeply offended by your insipid remarks. If you had one ounce of intelligence that would be about ten times what you presently possess. And for you to denigrate the shirt that I am wearing in my avatar after my mother handsewed every stitch to make it so look good that people point at me on the street, well, I didn't think anyone could sink to such depths and I have no other choice but to call you a name.
p**** **** ** A ****** !!
sincerely,
Mr. Joseph P. Nation
BTW the P stands for Phoenix. I thought you'd all like to know.
Mr. Nation:
I am appalled that you chose to co opt my name for your own nefarious purposes. Please expect to hear from my attorney!
Most graciously yours,
Phoenix (the original)
But but but but (blubber) that means we have something in common, unlike that creepo Gus who's just funny and wears what appears to be a rolled-up placemat on his head. And
what was the subject of this again??
I remember! I remember! <waving hand around>
The thing is, there are things that some people hold as axiomatic that are deeply offensive or even just puzzling to others. It is understood that we are posting on a message board rather than sending private emails because we are soliciting input. "This is what I think; what do you think?" is implicit in every posting.
Maybe. I will go with Joe's wheatable analogy, though. If I disagree with the whole idea of communion, I will not consider that disagreement to be a useful contribution to the discussion.
I would just like to add that while it is nice to have an opinion on something, you do not need to post your opinion in every single thread. Pick and choose what you feel are good threads in which you can add to the existing discussion. Popping your head in and saying "I don't care about so and so..." does not add to an existing discussion.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace
