[NR] New List...I disagree...no wait now I agree

marc-carlson at utulsa.edu marc-carlson at utulsa.edu
Wed Jul 11 11:05:30 PDT 2001


I would like to point something out, so could we please step back and look at
this last paragraph.

HE Kat wrote:
> Also, I don't see the purpose in insinuating that people are throwing
> jabs or insults when all I've seen so far is open, honest discussion.
> No one here is attacking anyone and all it does is stir up trouble
> and create hard feelings when people are accused of things they
> aren't doing.

I realize that she are referring to the insinuations being people being accused
of things that they haven't done, and I sympathize with that completely.

If we break down that paragraph, we actually can see both sides of the problem
that can occur when people disagree strongly.

If it is true that one hand all we have is open, and honest discussion, with no
one attacking anyone -- then how, on the other hand, can we have hard feelings
created by people being accused of things that they aren't doing?  The reality
is that - as contradictory as this appears - it's true.

Now, for my perspective -- I was trying to speak in generalities, and trying to
avoid accusing anyone of anything.  Just describing a real situation.  That is
all I am doing here.  And if anyone has been perceived or is being perceiving
anything I've said as an attack towards either side of the northern regional
disagreement, I want to repeat that it is not my intention.

When anything is written there are two people involved in a transaction, an
exchange of ideas.  Those two people are the writer and the reader.  Now the
writer may be biased, may have some intended or unintended tone, or not good at
expressing themselves, or any number of other things - including trying to have
an open, honest conversation.  For example, I am regularly accused of having an
 cold scholarly tone, that can make a disagreement with someone sound like the
"Voice of God" in establishing "FACTS".

On the other hand, there is also the reader.  Just like the writer, the reader
may be biased, or have some other unintended filter inserting a tone into the
message that may not have been there originally.  They may also not read
particularly well, or get bored looking at long missives like this one, or any
other number of other perfectly innocent reasons for missing the writers
intended message.  I have also been in discussions where I've clearly misread
what's been said, based solely on the similarity to previous arguments that were
similar (which means blaming the author for things they haven't said, and may
not have intended on saying at all - just because it looked like an earlier
arguement I've seen).

When two people disagree on a fundamental issue, it is very easy for the
communication to get garbled and one side or the other to feel like they are
bing insulted, put down, forced to shut up, whatever -- when that may not have
been the intention of the person they were communicating with (it may also HAVE
been the intent, but that's a different issue and takes us out of the realm of
open, honest discussion).

In short, what I'm trying to say here is that Her Excellency appears to feel
that she is being attacked, and silenced, when I am certain that was no one's
intent; JUST AS others were feeling attacked and silenced earlier, when I'm
pretty sure that was not the intent of anyone who was writing then.

Marc/Diarmaid



More information about the Northern mailing list