I'm not saying that I wouldn't prefer to see him leave the barbs out of his editorials, I'm just saying that it is ridiculous for people to try to beat him into changing his style. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Except that's not what you're saying. You're attempting to persuade us that we shouldn't feel insulted at all, not that we shouldn't try to persuade him not to insult us.
Tom, are you still focussing on the one essay? If so, I said that the one quote shouldn't be taken as an insult. Aside from that, I don't think that I've tried to take away anyone's right to feel insulted. Go for it.
What I did try to show is that there is a difference between insulting a group and insulting an individual.
When I talked about being insulted as a group vs being insulted as an indivudual, I said that the same words directed at at individual were mean. Those words, directed at a group can be tossed-off as opinion and we should be able to avoid focusing on the insult and instead, focus on the substance.
And, you're right. I'm not trying to stop you from pursuading him not to insult you. What I am saying is that 1) not everything should be taken with the same indignance as a personal insult, 2) you aren't trying to just stop him from insulting you, but you are trying to brow beat him into behaving as you would have him behave stylistically. 3) the beatings aren't working. 4) if your altruistic goal is to help him communicate more effectively, you should try another tact.
Posts: 2425 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
I'm just meeting the man on his own terms - those that he has set himself. He's already cast his collective insults to forum participants that go way beyond my slight - in your adoration of him, you let him get away with it.
That being said, I happily retract the word "pathological" - for the time being.
Posts: 53 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Pelegius: Speed, comedy operates under different rules than philosophy. Bill O'Reilly is well known for his "spin" on world affairs, and is thus no more trustworthy than any of the other spewers of hate-sermons that pollute the airwaves, dragging ideas down to their basest level.
A couple times a year I have to respond to trolls, just so I can remember why I never respond to trolls.
quote: What I did try to show is that there is a difference between insulting a group and insulting an individual.
I'm not sure I'm willing to concede this, LadyDove. I don't see why I should take "all fat men are stupid" to be less of an insult than "you, Tom Davidson, are stupid." That one is more demonstrably false (and to clarify, I'm referring here to the former) does not make it less insulting. When King of Men -- just as an example -- posts that he believes all religious people are deluded, I do not see a queue form to reply to his detractors that, hey, he didn't say that some specific religious person was deluded.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Okay, the first part was a snippy way to answer and I apologize. However, I do think that we have control over how closely we identify with any given group, whereas we don't have a choice over how closely we identify with ourselves.
That is the difference, IMO.
Posts: 2425 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
No. But I have asked repeatedly what better way anyone has come up with to get Card to stop insulting large swaths of the population, and what individual or individuals would be willing to make the attempt, and so far the silence has been deafening. If you've got a better idea, please put it forward.
(BTW, would you consider it tactful to tell someone who's been raped that "if you want to feel insulted, you can?" I recognize that this is a broad and overexaggerated example, but I put it forward to demonstrate that the "you are only harmed if you acknowledge harm" bit isn't really much of an argument.)
And FWIW, I identify very strongly with the general population of Hatrack. Insults directed at that general population are fairly difficult for me to ignore, as a consequence.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, let me point out that I am usually willing to say that specific persons are, indeed, deluded.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
Your example would have been closer to the original assertion if you had said that "rape isn't necessarily insulting". That would have addressed a group. Instead, you addressed an individual, and I would imagine that an individual would say, "Insulted? more like violated." In that instance, using the word insulted would be condescending and rude.
Also, I'm not saying, "you are only harmed if you acknowledge harm". I'm saying that all insults directed at a group are not necessarily directly personally at each and every group member. To my way of thinking, the only way to let that kind of gross generalization be taken as a personal insult is to assume that one embodies all the aspects of the group and the group projects one's thoughts without flaw. Aside from this assumption, we can each, as a fully functioning cognitive being, decide whether to be offended and act, challenged and change or to ignore the insult as an hyperbole directed at other members of the group.
As to how to modify someone elses behavior... Behavior is so closely linked to attitude that the answer seems to be to change the attitude.
I know that my attitudes have been changed by many of the things I've read here. It is the reasoned argument and personal stories that have made a difference to me. I don't think that I've ever had my attitude changed until I felt safe in the person's presence. When I felt safe, then I was receptive, but not until then.
I'm not much of a manipulator, so I haven't studied the idea much except where it applies to kids and dogs. Neither of which would work very well in an online forum, so I can only rely on my own experience.
Posts: 2425 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee: You did not decribe actions. You ascribed motives to actions with no basis for doing so, lumping together everyone who performed those actions under a common motive.
Dag, that's your interpretation. You're welcome to it, but it isn't necessarily there in what I wrote, nor does that interpretation seem to be the only one held among the other posters.
Posts: 3826 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: But I have asked repeatedly what better way anyone has come up with to get Card to stop insulting large swaths of the population
I think he should write the way he wants to write. He knows more about writing and influencing people than we ever will, so I think we should just shut up and defer to his greater expertise, his thousands of hours of research, the many, many, many books he's read.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Dag, that's your interpretation. You're welcome to it, but it isn't necessarily there in what I wrote, nor does that interpretation seem to be the only one held among the other posters.
Sure it is. You claimed that the creator paying attention was the impetus for scurring to placate.
That's what motive means - the reason someone did something.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: I'm saying that all insults directed at a group are not necessarily directly personally at each and every group member.
I'm not sure why you think this is better. To my mind, it's actually considerably worse. I can cope just fine with personal insults; it's the baseless ones that are still somehow supposed to apply to me that bug me.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
::shakes head:: I am a human being, a woman, a mother, an American, a student, white, a Californian, a German, a Liberal, a teacher, a reader, a Hatracker, a Democrat, and the list goes on...
If I choose to attach my self-image to all of these groups, I could spend my entire life offended by the hyperboles or baseless accusation that I hear everyday. But that would be a sad and sorry waste of a life.
quote: What I did try to show is that there is a difference between insulting a group and insulting an individual.
I'm not sure I'm willing to concede this, LadyDove. I don't see why I should take "all fat men are stupid" to be less of an insult than "you, Tom Davidson, are stupid." That one is more demonstrably false (and to clarify, I'm referring here to the former) does not make it less insulting.
If I were to say that "all Fat Men are FAT," that would be true, and nonetheless, in our culture, deeply insulting.
Posts: 63 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:He knows more about writing and influencing people than we ever will, so I think we should just shut up and defer to his greater expertise, his thousands of hours of research, the many, many, many books he's read
Nah.
quote:Those who disagree with me show little sign of understanding even the rudimentary principles I'm talking about; and those who agree with me are no better, merely assuming that I'm "on their team" and saying "go Orson!"
This statement seems to indicate that Card wouldn't agree with you that we should just accept everything he says. I hold him in high regard, and he certainly influences me, but I'm going to consider everything he says before I accept it.
Posts: 561 | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: If I were to say that "all Fat Men are FAT," that would be true, and nonetheless, in our culture, deeply insulting.
*nod* And indeed, if some insult were meant by that kind of tautology, the target(s) would not be remiss in taking insult. A line like "hey, you fat guys! You're all fat!" would almost certainly be intended as an insult, even if it's pretty nonsensical on its face, and I'd expect that the people who were its intended victims would react as if insulted even though it's just telling them something they already know.
IMO, the accuracy of an insult does not necessarily determine its effectiveness (although I believe that the worst insults have only enough truth in them to make them hard to dismiss out of hand). Personally, I suspect that the intent behind an insult is the single most important factor.
If KoM were to reply to someone "you seem like a very good Mormon," that Mormon would IMO have a legitimate right to suspect that he or she was being insulted. Which is why, when I was talking to Pete, I made such a big deal out of the importance of trust; it's because OSC doesn't trust my motivations, for example, that he believes I insult him -- despite my protestations to the contrary.
quote: If I choose to attach my self-image to all of these groups, I could spend my entire life offended by the hyperboles or baseless accusation that I hear everyday. But that would be a sad and sorry waste of a life.
The other component of an insult which is required before it becomes effective is respect for the opinion of the person who delivers the insult. When someone like digging_holes or Baldar insulted me, I was never particularly distraught; their opinions simply don't register on my self-image. In the same way, I don't often find myself worrying too much about what Ann Coulter would think of me. But I do hold OSC in fairly high esteem, so it's often like being kicked in the teeth when I forget and read one of his essays.
So here's my suggested recipe for an infuriating insult:
1) Delivered by someone whose opinion you respect 2) Clearly intended to be insulting 3) Broadly generalized and/or inaccurate, but true enough in broad strokes to require lengthy refutation
posted
Well-constructed, Tom. I've read it, circled around it, and can't find a chink. I have to concede.
Constants and other modifiers may be necessary, but I'd go so far as to say that the offensiveness of the insult is almost proportional to the product of the three factors you listed.
It's hard for me to be truly offended by someone whose opinion I don't respect at all.
I agree it's a factor, but I don't absolutely need them intend the insult to be offensive. We had pijama day at school one day, and I came in red Thai robe my wife had given me, and a classmate (intending to compliment me) said that I'd made a perfect impression of Hugh Hefner. As you can imagine, I was horrified and insulted, but not angry with her. Fortunately the robe is reversible to a different color. Posts: 63 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:1) Delivered by someone whose opinion you respect
Tom, I think your formula works well. The problem I see is that I view Card's negative comments as spatter-fire, directed, in the main, at those who don't that he exists.
Posts: 2425 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
I left after the homosexual marriage essay. I was incensed that someone I respect so much could say things that could be used to hurt my gay friends.
At a kids' birthday party, I was chatting with a gay friend about the party, his job, etc.; basically, small talk. My husband came over and starting talking about how angry he was about the way gay marriage was being denounced.
My friend's eyes glazed over, he nodded his head and put-up with it for a few moments more, then excused himself.
I caught-up with my friend later and he said, "Why do straight people assume that I want to hear how angry they are on my behalf? I don't need to get married, but mostly, I don't need to be their poster boy."
After that, I did alot of thinking. First, I realized that though *I* had been indignant on my friend's behalf, I'd have done him a better turn by not assuming that he would be offended at an issue I hadn't discussed with him.
Second, I realized that he doesn't know Card, so Card's words wouldn't hurt him.
I returned to Hatrack because the good so far outweighs the less than perfect and *I* am a better person for having been exposed to Card's work and to people like you who care so passionately about everything.
Tom, I am sorry that you've been hurt. I know that you love this community and believe that you are doing your best to keep it healthy and grow it. I just don't think that Card wants or needs you to be his editor in his forum. And I think that the attempt is causing more harm than good.
Posts: 2425 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Dag, that's your interpretation. You're welcome to it, but it isn't necessarily there in what I wrote, nor does that interpretation seem to be the only one held among the other posters.
Sure it is. You claimed that the creator paying attention was the impetus for scurring to placate.
That's what motive means - the reason someone did something.
But your interpretation presumes a number of other things as well. The few other responses I've received seem to agree the intentions _were_ placatory.
But that's never been my focus. I'm more concerned about the mass swing, the effect on the topic, and the potential effect on the forum as a whole.
Posts: 3826 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by LadyDove: My friend's eyes glazed over, he nodded his head and put-up with it for a few moments more, then excused himself.
I caught-up with my friend later and he said, "Why do straight people assume that I want to hear how angry they are on my behalf? I don't need to get married, but mostly, I don't need to be their poster boy."
After that, I did alot of thinking. First, I realized that though *I* had been indignant on my friend's behalf, I'd have done him a better turn by not assuming that he would be offended at an issue I hadn't discussed with him.
Second, I realized that he doesn't know Card, so Card's words wouldn't hurt him.
You're unusual among the non-gay pro-ssm folks I've run into, then, in that you do actually listen and pay attention, and realize that the world does not revolve around your guilt & redemption quest. The most ferocious and vindictive ssm advocates I know are usually self-described heterosexuals. As an anti-ssm hothead, I find that most of the gays in LTSSRs are fairly reasonable people to argue with.
Posts: 63 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
What I find interesting about OSC is that he is smart enough to know that alot of what his own political "team" says and does is very dumb, just like his opossition is equally dumb most of the time, and yet he still sides with them, (the right) because he considers himself a conservative?
I think anyone smart enough to realize that 95 percent of all politics is dart-throwing, should be an independent, and accessible to BOTH sides of every situation, the better to lend himself to the welfare of his country
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Since when has Card started considering himself a conservative?
His political "team" is the Democratic party. It has been since he was barely out of his teens. On every issue that he sides with Republicans (or whoever, so far he hasn't made any approaches to the Cybernetic Alliance [aka "the Daleks" ]), he's crossing party lines for the sake of his own beliefs.
Of course, I can't really understand why he continues to describe himself as a Democrat...I mean, I know about his insane hatred for the free-market system (as if living the consecrated life is even an option under any economic model), but I don't understand it. But then, I can't understand why anyone would be a Democrat other than because of boiling hatred for all that is good and decent, so that isn't really surprising Posts: 763 | Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
You said you've found Empire deeply affecting. In what way did it affect you, if not to help you reconsider your partisan biases?
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:as if living the consecrated life is even an option under any economic model
Within Mormonism, there IS an option for those who want to live the law of consecration. It's called "Fast Offerings."
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by DDDaysh: Ouch... what possible good could this thread do?
And why to my horror do I have the opportunity to look at a vintage Peligius soliloquy, only to jump on over to the last page and see that the person being responded to after 15 MONTHS IS ME!!!
I am quite disappointed that this thread has been brought up. I will not post here again, and if this thread continues I'll also enjoy cherry picking out my contribution to it. Sorry, that's just how it's going to be.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I miss his particular brand of sanctimonious pseudointellectualasim, and I didn't even get to see it for that long!
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Samp, If you look around, you may be able to find another poster who joined a few days after Pel left who bears a curious resemblence to Pel in many ways, including the sanctimonious pseudointellectualism.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mr. Card, do not take it personal. It is seems to have become American nature to belittle a person to attain self gratification. Most people are quick to discuss negative issues and break down something, and they break it down harder if they can tell a bit of emotion was put into it. Personally I adore your work, and Enders Game is honestly the reason I want to write. That novel hit me from start to finish, and I get more out of it every time I read it. I have read a lot of your work, and I am currently reading "Children of the Mind" again. I have just started reading your reviews, comments and articles. While I do not agree with all of your views, I think you have an uncanny ability to make your point clear. If someone immediately goes into a negative attack against something you said or wrote, please look more seriously into it before you take it so personal. My dad once told me words are only as powerful as you let them be. Essentially somebody can call me a dumb@$$, but I am only one if I believe what they told me. Don't let someone bashing you about a book review that they did not even read the book bother you. The world is full of stupid people, and if you let them all get to you you run around life to angry to enjoy it. You are loved and received, look at all the people registered on your site. As for the other authors not getting bashed on their sites, well pooh on them. Maybe they don't write with enough controversy to inspire emotional arguments. Take it as a compliment that you inspire attackers PS When I finish my book, the only review that would matter to me would be yours or Isaac Asimov's and I am obviously not getting his.
Posts: 120 | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't hate the world, but I do eat babies. They are way to tender to pass up the chance when it comes, but I guess that is why I am a republican
Posts: 120 | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
You know I just realized that my first post on this page was actually my first post on Hatrack, ever?
That's kind of wierd, that it took like 15 months to get a response to my first post. Is that wierd or what?
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
]), he's crossing party lines for the sake of his own beliefs.
