From: Mark Steven Heyman (markheyman@infoproconsulting.com)
Date: Thu Jun 24 2004 - 22:44:39 BST
Hi Dan and Rich,
There's actually a fourth way to deal with such a person, which is a
combination of Rich's 2 and 3: Argue with him in a
reasoned, respectful manner till you've proved his ideas are racist,
then denounce him and his ideas by calling them what they are.
This is the method I used, though I can certainly understand Rich's
POV. Still, as Dan has pointed out, my argument was a waste of time
and energy. If you look at his response to my last series of
questions, you'll see that not only has he not budged an iota, but he
feels quite comfortable in suggesting that the separate and not even
equal perspective within his "church" is not at all racist. So...
there ya go.
Anyway, I'm taking Dan's advice. The guy and his hate seem happy
together, so I'll leave him alone with his hate.
Best to all,
Mark Steven Heyman (msh)
--
InfoPro Consulting - The Professional Information Processors
Custom Software Solutions for Windows, PDAs, and the Web Since 1983
Web Site: http://www.infoproconsulting.com
"Thought is only a flash between two long nights, but this flash is
everything." -- Henri Poincare'
On 24 Jun 2004 at 12:39, Dan Glover wrote:
Hello everyone
>From: Richard Loggins <brloggins@yahoo.com>
>Reply-To: moq_discuss@moq.org
>To: moq_discuss@moq.org
>Subject: Re: MD The Final Cut
>Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 06:59:36 -0700 (PDT)
>
>- I should explain that there are three approaches to
>a guy like Paul V, 1)ignore him which is a tacit
>condoning of his views, 2)argue with him in a
>reasoned, respectful manner which gives the impression
>that his views are equally respectable or legitamite,
>or 3)denounce him and his ideas by calling him names
>like bigot. I chose the last route because if there
>ever was an appropriate time for ad hominem attacks,
>this is it.
Hi Rich
I think I disagree that to ignore someone is a tacit condoning of his
views. By acknowledging someone who is spewing hate you give them a
platform upon which they can climb in order to spew their vile ever
farther. You're not going to change a person's mind when their views
are extreme to begin with so there's no reason to argue with them.
And what possible difference are you going to make by calling them
names? Odds are they've already been called that and worse. Besides,
that's what they want!
I don't think this subject comes up in ZMM or LILA but during my work
on LILA'S CHILD I got the impression that Robert Pirsig's Subjects,
Objects, Data and Values presentation fell upon deaf ears. I had the
opportunity to ask Mr. Pirsig if he would use a different approach in
the future. He said he thought it best to leave them (his audience)
alone with their paradoxes. I think it's best to leave someone alone
with their hate.
Dan
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 : Thu Jun 24 2004 - 23:14:35 BST