Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > -- > Faustine: > > > > I can't see why, when I make a general statement about the > > > > importance of not coming across like a paranoid, someone > > > > mistakenly thinks I'm referring to him, I explain I wasn't and > > > > apologize > > James A. Donald: > > > But your "apology" presupposed that he, (snip) > > Faustine: > > No it didn't. > > I notice you deleted the claim that you are supposedly rebutting, and > then, as usual, proceeded to rebut an entirely different claim, one that > I did not make, and then proceeded to dishonestly accuse me of saying > all manner of stupid things that I did not say. > > The claim that I made, and that you have conspicuously failed to deny, > was that: > : : your "apology" presupposed he, (and all who disagree with > : : you) to be your inferiors, ignorant, and benighted, that we > : : hold foolish views because we are ignorant trailer trash > : : blinded by rigid ideology,. that if we bothered to check > : : the facts, facts you do not bother to research, check, or > : : present, we would discover that you were right and we are > : : wrong. I addressed it with the following: >That's an entirely different issue from the other ones you raised about my >beliefs and motivations, which totally aren't warranted. Your interpretation is way off base because you decided to see everything I write through the filter of "hidden nasty meanings". I never insinuated any of that at all. Unlike you, I never claimed to know what people here know or don't know. Given that I've never brought up the jobs I've held or what research my name has appeared on, isnt it a little premature to make such sweeping generalizations about me? I already said I don't feel the need to post my CV to be able to back myself up making a point, why would you think I'd expect anyone else to. Another important point you're missing is that I don't have to agree with, personally like or(even be polite to) someone to respect them. Likewise, people don't have to agree with, like, or be polite to me in order for me to get something out of talking to them. Like my exchanges with Tim here: it hasn't exactly been what anyone would call sociable, but I respect him all the same. So what makes me respect someone, then? Intelligence, knowledge, dedication and creativity. When it comes to really learning from someone, "do you have something to say and do you know how to say it?" is the only question that really matters. All the personal crap and ego issues can be annoying, but ought to be kept irrelevant. And no matter how much you respect someone, you should never be intimidated out of your own independent judgment. Change your mind, but always do it on your own terms. Actually, because of where I am and what I do I hardly ever find myself arguing the issues with people who agree with me at all anymore. It's a whole different ball game from when I was younger, when I surrounded myself almost exclusively with Objectivists and Libertarians. I spent a hell of a lot of time reading all the "correct" philosophy and literature, appreciating the "right" music and art, attending meetings, philosophy conferences, study groups, the whole nine yards. I suppose you could say that the issues I seem so blunt about here come from my early experiences with people who were paying lip service to the idea of independent thought, but in their own way were every bit as smug and intellectually lazy as the people they despised. And it's certainly something I want(and need)to fight in myself--"no free pass" for myself, least of all. Time to move on... ~Faustine.
