Hi Max: This post may appear lengthy because I quoted many of your comments, but it is actually a short post with respect to my responses. I chose to make a separate post to you as well as respond to your comments on Philo's post because I was not sure if you would have opprotunity to review his post again. Here it is:
Hi Maximus: Thanks for responding to me. Here are my follow-up remarks to your comments:
Amazing, your response suggests you are taking my remarks as being to you personally as to comments you wrote. Please don't read anything in to my post, I simply had an opportunity to say something just like everyone else.
I took nothing personally, nor felt that I was being addressed. And I respect you equal right to express your views.
You continued,
I thought philo's points were well made and I wanted to associate myself with them.
I agree, and likewise commented to Philo, commending his post.
You continued by quoting me, then commenting,
:: "And I find that those who visit such forums and make these judgments, as did your friend, without understanding human dynamics, are either very ignorant, or very callous, or assholes."That's quite a leap, to assume a simple personal observation is made without understanding of human dynamics. I'm seeing many posts all over the board from folks who are reeling, who are calling for a better way. ... I submit to you that to make a sweeping assertion that they are all ignorant, or very callous, or assholes, is in itself the height of ignorance.
Not really a leap or a sweeping generalization. Some are ignorant. I have exhibited ignorance at times. This is not a character flaw, just a fact that exists at times. Same are callous, not as a deliberate flaw, but they do not take time to try and understand or empathize. We all fail in this, but some do it more than others, likely due to habit. Some are assholes, because they do have a level of knowledge and understanding, yet choose to knock people down emotionally. This is not a sweeping generalization, but rather, an acknowledgement of the various personalty behaviors exhibited on various forums.
You said,
The person I refer to is a professional who understands human dynamics very well, and so do I; you miss the point.
Since I do not know of whom you refer, I may have missed the point.
You said,
What happens here is someone strings a couple of words together and another feels obliges to translate, dissect and expand them ad nauseam, then the originator replies in kind, escalating. I won't do that, whether misunderstood or not.
You correctly notice one of the many dynamics of debate in action.
You said,
Neither he nor I need a lecture.
No one is lecturing you that I know of.
You quoted me and then commented,
:: "Come on! People need a break ... they were beat down enough as JWs, why keep telling them to grow up and start trying give structure and controlling them."Whaaaat? Structure? Controlling? You've made another gigantic leap. I just observed a lotta people need to grow up. No smiley, no sneery. Not forced, not coerced. "Lotta" is light, not meant to elicit a prickly response.
I find that when someone starts talking about 'growing up' it can, and often does reflect a condensending attitude. We all do this at times, and I have done it. It is not a giantic leap, unless you may be a mental miget. Your use of the term 'lotta' with respect to people growing up is in itself a sweeping generalization, because it lacks specifics as to who, what, when, how.
Internet Chat: One person may be trying to use humor and another takes it as serious. With all of the normal communication tools being reduced to one, the 'written word' 90% of our ability to convey what we really mean is lost. In studies it is proven that the listener only hears about 10% to 15% of what we say. The rest is communicated in body language, tone of voice, facial expressions, and mannerisms. None of us are exempt form this problem, and therefore, I submit to you that we simply take more time to work things through and understand one another. Logic demands this.
You said,
I'd like to explore ways of giving people tools in an atmosphere where they CAN grow up. But that's another story.
Maybe you can make a separate post where you can provide a commonly acceptable definition of 'grown up' or 'maturity' and then describe the 'tools' you feel people need to have in order to make such progress. I would be fascinated by such an exploration.
You said,
I have no intention of discussing this further. Hope you and yours have a wonderful Fourth!
This last statement betrays you: I find that people who jump out to make their points, regardless of whether their points have merit or not - which by the way I found your response very good - exhibit a 'hit and run' attitude. They take their oral swipes, and then run like hell. Of course when they are chased down, they assert that they have maxed out on the topic and have no more interest. yet, they deny the receiptient of their comments the opportunity to seek accountability for what was said. Since I happen to know you personally, I have observed this tendancy in you over time.
I agree that there is a limit to anything, wherein we can began to beat 'dead horses'. But I find that much of the time, people will start a round of comments, and then slip away when the challenge increases. I am not suggesting that we need to meet every debate and challenge. Time constraints, etc. can present logistical issues, as well as in-depth interest. But I do, in your specific case, find this a common pattern to take a 'stab' and run. That's okay, I accept it without judgment. - Amazing