Re: MD Partisan Politics, Labels and Distraction (was terrorism)

From: Erin (macavity11@yahoo.com)
Date: Mon Oct 17 2005 - 22:36:34 BST

  • Next message: Scott Roberts: "Re: MD The SOL fallacy was the intelligence fallacy (was Rhetoric)"
  • Next message: Scott Roberts: "Re: MD The SOL fallacy was the intelligence fallacy (was Rhetoric)"
  • Next message: Platt Holden: "Re: MD Re: I Am The Fox's Parrot"
  • Next message: David M: "Re: MD Rhetoric"
  • Next message: Rebecca Temmer: "Re: MD bullshit"

    I see you put your "right" statements in quotes so
    they don't count. You are a tricky dicky
    "independent".

    You wrote:
    I think analogies are necessary rhetorical devices.
    > I'm not sure what you're
    > saying, except maybe that "my" analogy creates the
    > problem. If so, how do we
    > ever hold a discussion of the problem, of ANY
    > problem?

    I am not saying your analogies are the problem.
    What I am saying is when you use a football analogy
    then don't complain about others representing things
    as "my team" vs. "your team" because that is exactly
    what your football analogy does.

    You may be offering a BETTER dichotomy....but it is
    still a dichotomy is what I am saying.

    When you stop making "right" comments then I will
    believe you have transcended a right/left dichotomous
    thinking pattern. I'm sorry I go deaf to the "Platt
    made me do it" sentiment.
     You make those comments because you find the
    right/left dichotomy useful.
    Erin

    --- "Arlo J. Bensinger" <ajb102@psu.edu> wrote:

    > Hi Erin,
    >
    > [you wrote]
    > If you want people to act/think as individuals then
    > the first step is treating
    > them as such and not lumping them into a "party
    > people" category.
    >
    > [Arlo]
    > Fair enough. But my purpose in all this is to get
    > anyone to act or think as an
    > individual. My purpose is to expose a cultural
    > problem, or dialogic deficiency.
    > Without explaining the problem, or bringing it into
    > some type of analysis, I'm
    > not sure how to go about talking about solutions.
    >
    > [you wrote]
    > Like Before you complained about using a "my team"
    > or "your team" football
    > analogy BUT you were the one who brought that
    > analogy in the first place.
    >
    > [Arlo]
    > I think analogies are necessary rhetorical devices.
    > I'm not sure what you're
    > saying, except maybe that "my" analogy creates the
    > problem. If so, how do we
    > ever hold a discussion of the problem, of ANY
    > problem?
    >
    > [you wrote]
    > Just like when you consistently make statements
    > about "the right" and deny you
    > don't follow Platt's left/right dichotomy.
    >
    > [Arlo]
    > Like I said, its not that I "dont get" or
    > acknowledge that there exists people
    > who call themselves "conservatives" and people who
    > call themselves "liberals".
    > As far as using these words, I have no problem. When
    > I use them in scarequotes,
    > as is nearly always the case (unless sleep
    > deprivation has kicked in) it is to
    > acknowledge that these self-acclaimed people exist,
    > but to deny that all of
    > reality can be captured by the cultural dichotomy
    > (evidenced here in this forum
    > by Platt). Hence, I've never denied there are
    > "conservatives" or "liberals",
    > and so will use those words (in scarequotes) to
    > faciliate the discussion at
    > hand. But I won't use them in support of the
    > either-or, good-evil, right-wrong
    > split many want to go along with it.
    >
    > [you wrote]
    > I just don't find consistency in your
    > argument....and that isn't an insult I
    > think it is hard to be consistent which these kind
    > of topics.
    >
    > [Arlo]
    > Fair enough. And when you call me on thise
    > inconsistencies I will either try to
    > explain myself, or acknowledge them. Paradox and
    > Confusion, I'm told after all,
    > guard the Gates of Truth.
    >
    > Arlo
    >
    >
    > MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    > Mail Archives:
    > Aug '98 - Oct '02 -
    > http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    > Nov '02 Onward -
    >
    http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    > MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
    >
    > To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the
    > instructions at:
    > http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
    >
    >

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Oct 18 2005 - 02:44:49 BST