| eta_ta ( @ 2007-08-01 13:57:00 |
Tedious indeed
It's like a nightmare marry-go-round of mistaken identity.
Or are we using some drastically different variations of English? Languages where the same words have completely opposite meanings? Or was it deliberate?
In any case, I give up. What a bore.
UPDATE
"...a kind of discourse I have seen frequently in academia. It is produced by professors who have a grudge against somebody or something. They express their dislike publicly. Other people respond to the professor's statements, expressing disagreement with their factual or logical basis or the ethical system reflected in the statements.
The professor responds to these criticisms, and, over the course of many exchanges, realizes that he is losing in the game of competitive discourse. He stops bringing forth his own arguments and changes tack.
He switches to a form of argumentation in which he takes the words of the people who have argued against his stance and uses their words in his own argument. The very accusations of poor logic, incorrect facts, or inadequate ethics are turned back onto those who made these criticisms of the professor's public statement in the first place.
Those who thought they could carry on a reasoned and reasonable argument with the professor soon find themselves the targets of vindictive vituperation, insult, and libel.
... People who are not professors might simply say, "This guy is nuts," and walk away...
(Anonymous commenter @Dr.Sanity)
I walk away.
It's like a nightmare marry-go-round of mistaken identity.
Or are we using some drastically different variations of English? Languages where the same words have completely opposite meanings? Or was it deliberate?
In any case, I give up. What a bore.
UPDATE
"...a kind of discourse I have seen frequently in academia. It is produced by professors who have a grudge against somebody or something. They express their dislike publicly. Other people respond to the professor's statements, expressing disagreement with their factual or logical basis or the ethical system reflected in the statements.
The professor responds to these criticisms, and, over the course of many exchanges, realizes that he is losing in the game of competitive discourse. He stops bringing forth his own arguments and changes tack.
He switches to a form of argumentation in which he takes the words of the people who have argued against his stance and uses their words in his own argument. The very accusations of poor logic, incorrect facts, or inadequate ethics are turned back onto those who made these criticisms of the professor's public statement in the first place.
Those who thought they could carry on a reasoned and reasonable argument with the professor soon find themselves the targets of vindictive vituperation, insult, and libel.
... People who are not professors might simply say, "This guy is nuts," and walk away...
(Anonymous commenter @Dr.Sanity)
I walk away.