Greetings to all fellow/equal posters,
Addressing the initial post in this thread:
:When an employer resorts to comments like 'who sign's your check?' or 'are you biting the hand that feed's you?', it is normally due to some perceived or overt violation of loyalty, or simply to shut the employee up regarding the subject matter at hand.
I don't like the tactic, because it is rarely used in a one on one situaltion, but generally in the ear shot of other's, to squelch the matter. It is a power based, control technique. It usually works.
Dannybear, I never thought I'd be sayin' this but bygod I agree with you 100% here. It reveals a horrible insecurity on the part of the employer too, like respect can be gained by this person through fear and intimidation, not earned. Reminds me of biblegod but that's something else again.....quite Machiavelian.
:Here on jw.com for any poster to even suggest that certain 'worthy', or 'accomplished ', tenured participants deserve special consideration, is restricting and trampling on other's free will and spirit. For an author to ascribe his works, as worthy of such recognition, is pure absurdity. Common sense, not to mention the vast diversity in thinking, should assure any writer, that not everyone will agree with his/her conclusion's on any given matter.
I agree with you again. I wonder, who it is that is suggesting they are worthy of special consideration? I do not necessarily agree that an author submitting their works for recognition is absurd though to demand special consideration because of them is. I do believe high quality works should be worthy of some credibility for the author.
:This assinine position, would promote the idea that because someone offered an opinion that held up to be true in the past, is no longer subject to review or critique for current stands. Complete hogwash.
This is true too. Anyone making an assertion should be willing to back up the assertion no matter how often in the past this person has proven other assertions. It is the only fair standard to apply to all. Is there someone who is making assertions and not backing them up? If so, bygod I will petition them to do so myself.
:There is also an attitude displayed by those who have adopted this course of 'power' and 'control', they believe that because they offer an answer or explanation for their particular stance, that anyone who does not accept their answer, as gospel, as the end of the matter, is thick, or unable to reason. Again the heighth of arrogance and conceit.
I am wondering if you are confusing someone "not accepting their answer" with someone not refuting an answer by using the same standards as those asked of the one making the initial assertion.
:One man's answer is another's question. These self induldged writer's just assume, that what they say has more weight than the next guy, this to me is where most of these threads, get sidetracked.
I think that the threads get sidetracked because people take reference to past works as "bragging" or demanding special consideration, I think such is merely establishing credibility.
:The 'power' poster thinks he has addressed the question or issue, it is a done deal. Even if he/she thinks she has just responded with the most literate and sound reply...the reader may not. In fact the reader may see the response as a flame or putdown, of the readers idea.
This is true. Sometimes an "answer", however well intended, can be misconstrued. Obviously the best thing to do, if one feels their sound refutation has been waved away like so much nonsense, would be to break it down to serious points in said refutation and ask why this is not considered credible argument. If you put an effort into argument then you (referring to all here) have every right to expect it to be addressed repsectfully. Of course one must be careful about content if planning to take a stand in this way. Example, the refutation "You suck" doesn't necesssarily merit a serious rebuttal. If one were to say "You're wrong because fact A, fact B and fact C." then it is really only right to get a thoughtful rebuttal/concession in reply.
:Until everyone can disagree, can point out the reason's, without being utterly destroyed, by name calling, condescending remarks, or ridicule of their thinking process, things will never improve. It is a stale mate, even if the power broker's don't see it.
Exactly the point I tried to make above. Again, it only works if both (or all) participants are willing to stay to the same standard.
:I used to feel indebted to a religious organization of men, who considered that their 'shit didn't stink' in comparison with other religious men. I realized very early on, after shedding the need to be a 'follower', that no man or group is worthy of 'power' and 'control' over what is truth and what is not. I don't give a good god damn, how long they spent researching, studying, publishing, spreading the 'good news'....they deserve no more no less respect, than the next guy.
Well I feel that an educated opinion is worthy of more serious consideration than an emotional comment. It's all about that credibility of sources and stuff. As a historian I have become aware of just how incredibly important source credibility is.
:I hear and see more truth comming out of real everyday life experiences, from people who have nothing to gain, or prove to me...than I ever have in reading some 'high minded' self appointed, 'feed you at the appointed time' teacher. The truth they(real life) teach me, is a pill a whole lot easier to swallow, to boot.
Again, I am in full agreeement. Real life is the greatest of teachers. The benefit of us being humans (besides the opposable thumb thing) is our wonderful ability to communicate. We can all share the knowledge we acquire out in the world and help our fellow man along on the journey. For instance, my sister in law, new mother, has greatly benefitted from my own experience as a mom. I have saved her countless difficulties by sharing my own life-lessons with her. That is the beauty of it. I guess some don't want to gain knowledge in that way but others do. I know I have greatly benefitted from some of those who take the trouble to post serious teaching/information stuff. Then again I remember someone whining about one of those kind of posts I find so educatonal as boring "reems and reems of information...". Guess we all want to get something different from this place.
I guess anyone who doesn't go for that stuff should just skip those posts. Just like I skip certain kind of posts that will obviously hold no interest for me.
:Don't toot your own horn at me. Don't expect me to roll over because you say it's so. Don't threaten me with 'taking your toy's' and leaving. You whoever that think your special or deserving of some special consideration.....think again...little man/woman....your no different than the rest of us. Equal is a very simple concept, when discussing matter's of the spirit and faith. That is what we talk about the most, isn't it? If so, equality and respect is not an option, it is a right.
Well I am half with you here. Yes, we are all equals in the sense that we all deserve common consideration to a point. We are not all at the same point of our journey. The tricky thing about discussions on this sensitive topic is again the uniform standard. If one makes assertions they should be prepared to back them up. If one wants to challenge these assertion one should do so in the same standard they would hold the one making assertions to. The real respect thing, that has to be earned and being highly educated is not the exclusive path to this. I think honesty and willingness to admit fault as well as conceding "I didn't know that, thanks for sharing" are all highly acceptable methods of earning respect.
Just my thoughts on the whole "equals" thing--regards to all,
Julie
