by palmtree67 699 Replies latest jw friends
welcome saintbertholdt and I so agree with your comment on page 5
Hi there Qcmbr,
Thank you for your post
You wrote: "True humility is the willingness to put your most cherished idea on the altar of peer review and dispassionately allow it to be dissected and examined and if, after weighing, it is found wanting to join in heartily as everyone takes a hammer to it."
Your statement reminds me of the concept of the 'Marketplace of Ideas'.
Soft+Gentle: btw you seem to be aiming for something opposite to qcmbr and I am still trying to digest this.
It's late, and I don't want to play games. What is the "opposite" I am aiming for?
You just posted that you disagreed with what Q said. I just showed you proof that he didn't say what you accused him of. Now you accuse me of something vague.
I'm tired, what is the game you're playing here?
no game palm - you have clearly stated that you think that qcmbr's tactics would remove discord whilst qcmr has clearly indicated that we should all be willing to peer review one another and join in heartily when everyone takes a hammer to our cherished ideas.
I don't think joining in heartily makes for concord. what do you say?
Soft +Gentle: whilst qcmr has clearly indicated that we should all be willing to peer review one another and take a hammer to our cherished ideas.
If you read with an unbiased mind, what he actually said was that if, after discussing our idea, we find it's not true, we should then be pleased to take a hammer to it.
His actual quote:
to put your most cherished idea on the altar of peer review....and if, after weighing, it is found wanting......to join in heartily as everyone takes a hammer to it.
I have now proved two of your "points" wrong. Unless your personal belief is to cling to wrong ideas, I don't see how you could have a problem with Q's comment.
Again, I don't know what game you're playing, but I'm done playing it.
Good night.
well if you want to think you have proved 2 of my points wrong then that is up to you. In fact I agree with both you and qcmbr - what I don't agree with you on is that concord is possible whilst dissecting and discarding ideas.
edit: to comment on the theme of your thread Palm - I think what we can aim for is to understand each other as far as possible. Also like tec I am against three or four people piling up on one individual and continuing to do this repeatedly - this is my definition of bullying. If we avoid that and try our best to understand the other person's pov then we at least have a "hearty" discussion.
In fact I agree with both you and qcmbr
NOW you say you agree with 2 points you just said you DIDN'T agree with??
Do you think it's funny to waste my time helping you to understand?
And now you bring up a third point to argue about?
what I don't agree with you on is that concord is possible whilst dissecting and discarding ideas.
Not nice, not nice at all.
Am i the only one who read aguest post 9816 on page ten? Am i the only one who got the referance at the end... In her 'signature' ? What her husband refers to her as....?
EE, that's been changed, but I've visited her site once or twice, and remember her mentioning her husband's indulgent tolerance of her "Shelbyisms" - as he calls her fantastical flights of fancy...
What do you mean its been changed? Its still there.... ? Or do you mean her story has been changed? And you do realize who the referance is too right?
"It's so nice to be insane...
"No one asks you to explain...."
