|
U-Know! Forum » Stupid old fart |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
grufty jim 1978 posts |
Feb 09, 2008, 14:47
|
||
|
shanshee_allures wrote: No snidiness Grufty not from me, sorry if you read it that way. And I will never resort to any base aggression here either. x I honestly don't know how else someone could read that statement, shanshee. "I think this debate is going nowhere. Let's call it a day." "You just don't want to talk 'cos I don't agree with you". If that's not snide, then what the hell is it?
|
|||
|
grufty jim 1978 posts |
Edited Feb 09, 2008, 14:54
Feb 09, 2008, 14:51
|
||
|
dodge one wrote: Bit Grufty...Jim? No. Grufty means "bearded". But yes, I was certainly rather 'gruff'. I'm afraid I'm naive enough to think this forum can be used to debate issues in good faith. So when I read little digs at me (or anyone) and snide comments about how I just don't want to debate 'cos someone isn't agreeing with me (precisely what the point of debating with someone who DOES agree with you, I just don't know), then yes, it riles me. In the past I've had to take lengthy breaks from this please for precisely that reason. I don't want to spend my time exchanging veiled insults. Seriously, it just depresses the hell out of me. If people can't argue from good faith, then I see no reason to engage with them.
|
|||
|
machineryelf 3681 posts |
Feb 09, 2008, 14:55
|
||
|
** Colonel Edward Armitstead, a Synod member from the diocese of Bath and Wells, said: "I don't think he is the man for the job. One wants to be charitable, but I sense that he would be far happier in a university where he can kick around these sorts of ideas."** Damn good idea, god forbid that anyone with anything intelligent to say should be released into the realms of the general public to try and inject some sort of sense into the tabloid media The reporting on this has been absolutely abominable, the Bishop made some sensible and informed comments and has been pilloried from post to post by the Sun et al as some sort of ''fuzzy wuzzy loving surrender monkey selling white women into slavery to the heathen, and destroying 1000's of years of upstanding english laws'' The only stuid old farts are as per usual the british press. I was unlucky enough to have had access to Fridays Mail, Mirror and Sun and have never read so much unmitigated bullshit in my life, not a single piece of sensible reporting in any of them
|
|||
|
shanshee_allures 2563 posts |
Feb 09, 2008, 14:55
|
||
|
Sigh. What I meant was 'I'm not agreeing with you so it's ended', something like that. If you want to believe anything else up to you. I have no need in my life to insult anyone on this forum, really. I enjoy it too much. And you have 'recontextualised it' slightly, and maybe I should've put one of those sideways smiely's in, cos I meant-no-harm. Peace. x
|
|||
dodge one 1242 posts |
Feb 09, 2008, 14:56
|
||
Jim, I speak for myself when i say that that often as not i'm looking for a conversation and not a "Debate". Were all just common folk's here. Please take this to heart as from a friend, You can be a bit heavy handed in your conversational style. I'm not above critisim... are you?
|
|||
|
grufty jim 1978 posts |
Edited Feb 09, 2008, 15:09
Feb 09, 2008, 15:08
|
||
|
dodge one wrote: Jim, I speak for myself when i say that that often as not i'm looking for a conversation and not a "Debate". That's what the Village Pump is for. The U-Know! forum is essentially socio-political. As such, it's pretty much set up for debating rather than conversation (though obviously that does happen, and I'm not suggesting it shouldn't... merely that plenty of people DO come here for a debate). Personally, I've never been one for "conversing" on the web. I don't find it a very satisfactory medium for that kind of interaction. I do find it suitable for debate, however. Each to their own. dodge one wrote: Were all just common folk's here. Please take this to heart as from a friend, You can be a bit heavy handed in your conversational style. As I say, I'm not conversing. If others find the web suitable for "hanging out and chatting" then I couldn't be happier for them. But that ain't me. And nor do I describe myself as one of the "common folks". No doubt this'll get me crucified here, but that's how it is. dodge one wrote: I'm not above critisim... are you? No, I'm not above criticism. Far from it. And I suspect you'd be rather surprised at just how *self*-criticial I actually am. But when I'm on this forum it's not about whether or not *I* am above criticism, it's whether or not *the position* I take is worthy of that criticism. And that's actually what makes this place (occasionally) quite useful. By expressing my position, I may discover it's not as robust as I expected and this allows me to modify it. And yes, there are actually examples of that happening (biofuels being the most obvious one... I went from a champion of biofuels to an opponent over the course of a couple of months; much of that transformation being a result of reading objections to my position online).
|
|||
ron 706 posts |
Feb 09, 2008, 16:29
|
||
|
grufty jim wrote: The world we live in has become powerfuly anti-intellectual and is worse for it. spot on james... singularly the most accurate assesment of the human condition that i've heard in quite some time, and believe me... with the 24x7 news cycle of talking heads, politicians and psuedo-celebs that's saying something... i too despair that there continues to be WAY too many unwilling or unable to grasp the "all of us or none of us" mentality... i for one certainly appreciate your clear mindedness, and willingness to make the effort... be...
|
|||
|
grufty jim 1978 posts |
Feb 09, 2008, 17:29
|
||
Many thanks ron. Nice of you to say that.
|
|||
handofdave 3515 posts |
Feb 10, 2008, 01:25
|
||
|
My serious response to this is yes, Shanshee, you're right. Any more religious invasions of societal law are not a good idea at all. As a matter of fact, I'm not comfortable with some of the notions Christianity brings with it, especially when it comes to the Revelationists and their apocolyptic wet dreams. Secular law is adequate to address disputes, if it's not being warped by special influence. Religion can never claim to not be out from under the influence of a certain collective decision.. tho it may not be an enemy of progressive causes, either. Common sense dictates that all must be considered and judged in the light of our own intellect, as this is what we possess as animals and what makes us unique.
|
|||
IanB 6761 posts |
Edited Feb 10, 2008, 22:21
Feb 10, 2008, 21:08
|
||
|
One small thing - aren't both the English legal system and the moral distinctions that underpin it based on twin pillars of Judeo-Christian teaching and Enlightenment notions of individual liberty? We may consider ourselves to be living in a secular society (which suits me fine) but we should be very clear about the foundations of our social systems. Overall I am not sure what appals me more Williams' naivetee, his grotesque treatment by the media or the uncloaking of some very unrighteous opinions amongst people who should know better. If I hear one more London liberal opine darkly (and without a single statistical fact at their fingertips) on the threat posed by the allegedly Leporidae-like birthrate among Muslims I will puke. Enlightment my ass!
|
| Pages: 8 – [ Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 | Next ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| U-Know! Forum Index | |
