Re: MD secular humanism and dynamic quality

Date: Thu Apr 01 2004 - 23:48:04 BST

  • Next message: "MD (no subject)"

    Platt said:

    Uh, never mind, it doesn't really matter what Platt said. Platt is attempting to take the high road, which is his typical rhetorical maneuver. First spit out some half-truths and villifying remarks, then 1) take the high ground by pretending to always exist at an honest, inquisitive, and truth-surveying level while 2) using the language of populism to slander "educated" individuals as ivory-tower elitists who don't deserve to sit at our table because they are all egomanical pricks, unlike us plain-spoken, clear-thoughted, slack-jawed yokels who are more worthy of truth then they are.

    I don't really care how I look anymore. Those conversants I care about, that I've cultivated decent relationships with, have a pretty fair view of me and I just feel sad for the few who aren't really interested in having a conversation and just enjoy villifying. I don't read or much like Wilber, but what was it he said about internet discussion groups? They're "almost entirely male occupied; it fosters anarchic and egocentric male agency ... most disturbing of all, a great number of the Infobahn males are digital predators - egocentric computer warriors that couldn't give a damn about intersubjective cooperation and mutual recognition." I gotta' hand it to him, he's right on there.

    I'm just sick of it. My time has already been winding down for a while. Many people's styles of conversation just don't click with me. Sometimes I don't understand them, sometimes they come across as "egocentric computer warriors" and leave a bad taste in my mouth, sometimes they talk like sages from on high, dispensing wisdom to all who would hear them, which just makes one look pompous. And sometimes the person thinks they are making really intelligent points, and I just completely disagree. Even worse, this last quality is most often accompanied by the "digital predator" quality, a sickening combination.

    But for posterity's sake, I can say honestly and forthrightly that I did _not_ "clearly indicate" that the reason why Platt is wrong is because "I, Matt, a highly educated intellectual (who does scholastic readings) find it funny that you, Platt, an ignorant brutish peasant, would dare to question me." It is implausible for me to be a highly educated intellectual. The truth of that attribute isn't what Platt's obvious wrongness hinges on, nor on Platt's possible attribute of being an "ignorant brutish peasant." It hinges entirely on familiarity with Rorty, which I have displayed a significant degree of for almost two years, and Platt has not. Platt, in fact, seems to take pleasure in not being familiar with him. Which is fine, I don't care, as I tried to point out. What is important is not familiarity with Rorty, is not whether Rorty is right or wrong, it was in how we judge communism.

    But Platt doesn't care about that. He just wants to villify me and prove Rorty wrong.

    Further, for the record, my previous post was obviously not an intellectual argument. It was an obvious attempt on my part to display 1) my weariness of conversation with Platt and 2) the fact that we'd been over this particular point before and I still agree with Kevin, not Platt. The truth is, I've gone through a lot of intellectual arguments over the past 2 years, and the fact of the matter is: I'm human, I do not have infinite patience, and I get pissed when people are dicks to me.

    But this is it for me. I now want to take the road I now should've taken a long time ago with several of this discussion group's more unpleasant participants. With that, I quote,

    "there is so little good will on the part of this gentleman that I see little point, apart from this response, in answering any more of his attacks, so do not mistake future nonrebuttal as a cowering silence."

    I've never quoted Wilber before, but the guy gets two today.

    I hope Platt and the others can agree with me on this point. There is so little good will on any of our parts that there is little point in any of us responding to each other. I think others would do well to heed this advice in their own personal confrontations.

    God knows I will. I'm only looking for people with good will.


    MOQ.ORG -
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 -
    Nov '02 Onward -
    MD Queries -

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Apr 01 2004 - 23:56:44 BST