From: Scott R (jse885@spinn.net)
Date: Sun Jul 13 2003 - 19:54:16 BST
Squonk,
[Scott prev] (Note: Since I agree with Bo's position about the S/O divide being the
mark of the intellectual level, and since I don't want to speak for Bo,
I am taking your charge of having a position that implies racism,
bigotry, etc., as applying to me.)
squonk: You will just have to get used to the idea that some people find you objectionable won't you?
I don't mind people disagreeing with me. I do mind people accusing me of holding objectionable ideas that I do not hold.
[Squonk prev:] sq: I agree differentiation's are found in all cultures. Eastern culture
is not as severe as the West, but its there, i agree. I do not believe i
have ever said Eastern culture does NOT have differentiation's?
[Scott prev:] I never said you did. You have said that I my position implies that
Eastern culture was not intellectual, which I flatly deny.
squonk: Skutvik disagrees with you, for he feels Eastern culture's are mindful but not intellectual.
I consider "mindful" to be mutually dependent with "intellectual". Apparently you don't. That you have turned this difference of understanding into an accusation of racism is what I meant by this:
"No. It is much harder than rocket science. In rocket science you know you are wrong when the rocket fails to hit its target. But in this case we are dealing with conflicting definitions, and interpretations built on interpretations. None of us were there when the intellect began to separate from the social. So we are making our best guesses, not only in coming to our own conclusions, but also in evaluating the conclusions of others. IT IS FOR THIS REASON that to make accusations of racism is reprehensible. The accusation came by piling assumption on assumption (and above I have shown why those assumptions are invalid), to accuse a fellow poster of a social crime. Doing so is an intellectual crime."
[Squonk prev:] sq: Skutvik conflates aesthetics, and in doing so denies the East of
one, namely the intellect.
[Scott prev:] You have a peculiar view of what constitutes the aesthetic, which it is
your right to have. But to use your view to interpret my position as
implying that we don't think the East has intellect is bad logic. It is
refutable by the simple observation that I DO think the East has
intellect.
squonk: It may be said with equal force that Skutvik has a peculiar view of what constitutes the intellect.
Yes. So why not argue the differing positions on their respective merits? Instead you post crap like this:
"sq: Skutvik is making all the assumptions. Have you been a supporter of his for a long time? Is that what is getting you hot under the collar? Didn't think it appropriate to question the great man and fell into his nonsense?"
I suppose I should be impressed that you are able to be incorrect, illogical, and insulting all in a few words. But I'm not. Instead it looks like you are reverting to type: when you can't convince someone else you resort to insult and invective. I hope you don't consider that high quality intellectual activity.
- Scott
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 : Sun Jul 13 2003 - 20:01:49 BST