|
Post by Glance A'Lot on Jan 4, 2010 15:09:47 GMT
Well, you know I'm right... it's the same conversation in all your posts... you post, someone disagrees, you try to convince him he is wrong, conversation ends in nothing. While that is a valid observation, it does not conclude who may be right or wrong - with the 'open end' that determination is left to the individual reader's own mind.
|
|
|
Post by kitty on Jan 4, 2010 15:12:35 GMT
Yup, am just Miss Ubershark, y'all know it. Nah but seriously, I don't try to bash Eli or his I'm sure long thought-through outings, I just don't see why by every post he makes someone feels the need to point out that his way of saying things isn't to someones liking, because frankly, we all know now that Eli writes funny, aka "emotionally cold". When people start to loose the argument about the actual topic, they always end up talking about how this and this wording isn't correct or that the source is not reliable or that one must consider this and that option before addressing the subject etc., wouldn't it be better to either accept ones defeat or just move on and get out of the topic? Well, whatever I guess.
|
|
|
Post by kitty on Jan 4, 2010 15:16:57 GMT
Well, you know I'm right... it's the same conversation in all your posts... you post, someone disagrees, you try to convince him he is wrong, conversation ends in nothing. While that is a valid observation, it does not conclude who may be right or wrong - with the 'open end' that determination is left to the individual reader's own mind. Yes sure, no outcome is an outcome too - but I simply assume that Eli does not write all that stuff so people read it and ignore it afterwards. Isn't the point of a forum like that to discuss, preferably learn something (from others!) too? Because if it isn't and Eli's intention is really just to have people read what he thinks is right, then I think the former poster observed the correct thing - that he comes across slightly too full of himself (or how he worded it "in an academic tone").
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jan 4, 2010 17:04:30 GMT
The idea is to put my ideas out there for people to accept, reject, discuss, debate - whatever they like, really.
I'd be pretty stupid to put stuff up without expecting others to disagree (Sometimes very strongly) - because that's what people do. If anyone comes up with totally irrefutable evidence of something (A thing I cannot ever say I have done) then someone, somewhere will disagree regardless.
Obviously I think I'm right (Else I would not post this stuff) but that doesn't mean there's not a heck of a lot for me still to learn. Nor am I incapable of error, and if anyone is going to spot holes in any of my theories, it'll be the highly debative people on here! ;D
If all I wanted was readers, I'd start a blog somewhere and disable comments.
EDIT: and one final note: for a lot of Humanology topics there's no absolute 'win' or 'lose' because there are so many shades of opinion that cannot be definitively proved or disproved. As such, many of those topics (And not just my theories) are bound to end with an agreement to disagree, written or otherwise.
|
|
|
Post by kilgoretrout on Jan 4, 2010 21:50:48 GMT
I never particularly disagree with EK , just find his approach slightly disturbing , as if written by someone who is posturing above or outside of the experience of human beings. For me , it's not the content really , it's the delivery. And you are right EK , most of this stuff is opinion , if a belief were a fact , it wouldn't be called a belief , it would be known as a FACT.
|
|
|
Post by ss on Jan 4, 2010 22:00:21 GMT
I never particularly disagree with EK Then hows come you always disagree with me... ;D
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jan 4, 2010 23:19:07 GMT
My writing style is mainly about taking myself out of the equation. I don't feel qualified to condone or condemn people, so I state what I think is the truth and leave others to make up their own minds without trying to say whether I think something is 'good' or 'bad'. Such a judgement may be relevant to me, but that doesn't necessarily mean it will (Or indeed should) be relevant to any of you.
Historians always annoy the heck out of me by trying to push their values onto the people of the past, so I try to avoid that in my own writing. And thereby annoy others in turn, it seems! ;D
|
|
|
Post by kilgoretrout on Jan 5, 2010 0:38:31 GMT
I understand what you are doing with your writing , though it just isn't compelling and reads almost like preaching......I guess I'm just crazy. When I was here before , the reason you "got under my skin" was that writing style , I think kitty more succinctly expressed it. It is almost like you wish to wear flowing robes. ss , you are not the worst of religious people I have encountered , I like to hear your biblical perspective. You are less judgmental than most , so i must pick your brain...
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jan 5, 2010 11:15:25 GMT
Well, flowing robes worked for Aristotle... ;D
|
|
|
Post by Glance A'Lot on Jan 5, 2010 11:19:57 GMT
Well, flowing robes worked for Aristotle... ;D ...in an un-English climate however!
|
|
|
Post by Elliot Kane on Jan 5, 2010 11:47:13 GMT
Well, flowing robes worked for Aristotle... ;D ...in an un-English climate however! Point. And today is real brass monkey weather! Guess I'll have to do without the robes, after all. Darn! ;D
|
|
|
Post by kilgoretrout on Jan 6, 2010 0:35:42 GMT
Well, flowing robes worked for Aristotle... ;D As Wayne Cambell would say "Shyaah! as if!!"
|
|