Monday, September 5, 2011

No Debating Society Here

In a post written Saturday night, one reader (Cym) has been diligently trying to goad me into an argument or debate on a topic of her choosing. She has lambasted me because I have chosen not to engage her in a wide ranging discussion that, from my perspective, doesn't deal with the central thesis of the post in question.

I thought this would be a good time to explain something about the evolution of this blog. Though it is not something that Scott and I have formally agreed upon, neither of us is interested in turning this blog into a place of debate, controversy and made up imbroglios.

The way we see it is that we present our various ramblings and observations about philosophy and life, in general. We provide you, the reader, with a space -- the comments section -- to share your thoughts and/or reactions to what we have posited.

On many blogs, these two sections are joined at the hip -- one flows directly into the other. The original author writes something and then a discussion, argument or debate ensues via the comments section. Some of these "discussions" can become quite nasty and aggressive. There are some people who only comment in order to initiate some sort of tempest and become very agitated when others refuse to be drawn in to their game.

On this blog, we take a more liberal view. We get to have our say out here and you get to have your say via the comments section. Sometimes these two areas will intersect, but frequently they don't.

Life is short enough as it is. In the past, I have been prone to argue. I am working very hard to move away from this mentality. That's why I have chosen to allow your comments to stand independently. You are entitled to your own opinion just as I am entitled to mine and Scott is entitled to his.

Why debate them? Why engage in a back-and-forth series of snipes? What does it accomplish other than riling people up?

As I have noted before, I read every single comment left here. Because of my OCD, I often read each comment several times!! (I forward to Scott all comments left on his posts and, from what he has told me, he reads each one of them.) I think about the comments and it is not uncommon that I see things in a different light.

But neither Scott nor I want to get into a debate with you. This blog isn't about scoring points on a make-believe chalkboard. We offer ideas and notions for you to consider. We both understand going in that you will agree with some of our ideas and not agree with others.

That's okay because, as Scott has written many times, all is well.

17 comments:

  1. So, each post stands alone, is set in stone, no room for growth, or change? Once it is written there is nothing more to say about it? You never revise. If someone raises a point, or a question, that suggests a potential flaw, or suggests a needed amendment, or need for elucidation, you are not interested, because once it is written, you have already moved on to something else, and don't even want to think about it anymore?

    Well, to me that is tremendously close minded and intellectually lazy. I'm not striving to win anything, every comment I leave is done with the purpose of improving understanding, for the love of wisdom, the love of truth. Clarification. Education. Elucidation.

    The beauty of blogs, the magic that really makes them come alive, is their interactivity. Where it's not just a one way conversation, but where the readers have an opportunity to actually COMMUNICATE not only with one another, but especially with the blogger, to engage one another, not so much in debate, but to simply discuss the post. Not only to ask questions, but also to offer suggestions, with the purpose of learning and improving understanding for all parties involved; not about winning points (that's fucked up if you think that's what I'm doing).

    You seem to be of the sort, that once you've written something here, there is no more to be said, the conversation is pretty much over, and I think that attitude really kills the whole beauty and magic of blogging.

    I apologize if in my previous comments I got a little off track, attacking you somewhat (which I only did later on out of frustration), but all I simply asked was for elucidation of your points, for you to consider some other points of view, to which you refused to even consider, and while you do have that right, I think it's a shame.

    This blog could be so much more than it is, being that it is a nexus for bringing interesting minds together, but by not encouraging more interaction, by you not making yourself more available, to personally respond to more comments than you do and to answer questions that are asked of you, you've really blown a valuable opportunity to learn, to grow, and to heal more as a person.

    I don't think I'm going to comment here anymore. It will be hard not to, so perhaps I will just have to stop reading it entirely.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thank you, gentlemen. I don't come here to debate. I come here to learn by pondering your posts.

    All is well.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Cym,
    I will say that, as you have indicated yourself, you're not very interested in Taoism and you certainly don't have a Taoist perspective on life. Your comment above indicates that you see things one way and whoever might disagree with you is wrong.

    I subscribe to the idea that each person must follow their own path. If you desire to have argumentative discussions with people, I'm cool with that. That's your way.

    As I've said before, that use to be my way too. Because of my OCD, I have gotten into some nasty back-and-forths on this blog and others. I always had to make one more point. I always had to have the last word.

    In essence, I would become consumed with arguing and debating. Realizing that this tack is not beneficial to myself or others, I have consciously chosen to go down a different path. I have come to understand that the best way to avoid these types of situations is not to be pulled into them in the first place.

    This path seems to upset you and so you try to browbeat me to follow your path, the only path you view as viable.

    Well, I've been there and done that more times than I would care to admit to. So, you can goad or insult me all you want. You can shake your finger at me. You can try to shame me.

    None of it will work. I think the path I have now chosen is more productive and I plan to stay on it as best I can.

    I do realize the above explanation may not satisfy you. There's a good chance you'll say it only shows I'm close-minded (?) and not willing to consider other viewpoints. If you believe that, you are not correct, but you can believe what you want, regardless.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Ah, no. You are really stretching things now. Are you by any chance hearing voices or seeing things that are not there? Is your medication not working? Or perhaps it's working so good, that it has numbed all the reason out of you.

    Nowhere in my comments did I say you were wrong. If I did, show me. Although perhaps you are wrong, are you completely unwilling to even entertain the possibility?

    Oh and by the way, when I call you close-minded, it is not based solely upon your responses to my comments, but upon a long range view, of having read your blog and comment spaces for years.

    I challenge anyone else, preferably someone not suffering from autism, or schizophrenia, or anxiety, or depression, (as the Rambling Taoist is, in fact by his own admissions) to show me specifically what I said that warrants the response I just received here.

    Yeah I'm being a jerk, but frankly so is RT.

    And by the way, following your own path, does in fact involve encountering other people, as well as obstacles and adversities that may at times cause a change in your own course. That following your own path is not the same thing as being an obstinate ass who refuses to alter his course when necessary.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Nowhere in my comments did I say you were wrong.

    Do you read your own comments? You have repeatedly said I am wrong not to answer the questions you pose (even those not germane to the post you're commenting on) and not to discuss the issues that you want to discuss.

    You've told me that my refusal to bend to your will proves that I'm close-minded.

    I am not close-minded at all. I simply don't want to debate you. Why is this so difficult a concept for you to grasp?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hi RT, I am not sure if you are aware of this Wikipedia article. It may be relevant for this discussion.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)

    Thank you for keeping up the good work with your interesting posts.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Cym is a text book troll. Please everyone avoid feeding it.

    ReplyDelete
  8. For my part, I don't consider Cym to be a troll. We both read a few of the same blogs and I have read hers as well. She has offered many thoughtful posts and comments throughout this time.

    That said, I do tend to find her chosen writing style and communication techniques often to be provocative and argumentative. There is nothing inherently wrong with either.

    But it's obvious to me that this blog isn't meeting her needs. She wants to entice others to engage her in fiery debates and we aren't cooperating. Because of this lack of cooperation, it seems to be bringing out the worst in her.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I always considered blog comments to be for sharing brief insights (positive or negative) concerning the blog entry, not for challenging the poster to deep discussion. Especially on this blog, where there are often several posts made in one day. When I make a comment, I might return once or twice to see if a reply was made and perhaps I will comment further if so moved, but with so much to read here (other sites are out there, too!) I leave it at that. A forum is a more appropriate place for an ongoing discussion.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Hmmm, Roshi Hogan has something that seems to fit this situation.
    "In an ocean of mis-perceptions, misjudgments, and misinformation, the Tao is a simple truth. One does not win an argument with the Tao. It endures like the sun, the moon, the universe. Man has a great gift for deceiving himself. Some avoid the truth at great cost later. We pretend not to notice the great truths, instead we create fictional mysteries. At the end of the day, the day ends and the truths prevail."
    http://roshihogan.blogspot.com/2011/09/great-gift.html

    ReplyDelete
  11. Oh really, I'm a troll now huh? Thanks guys for not even bothering to visit my blog, to see the bigger picture of who I am. You know I'm not just some idle passerby looking for an argument. Been reading for years, have had hundreds of comment exchanges with trey, most of them were exceptional positive and good willed.

    Personally I learn from debate. I like to discuss ideas, to get to the root of things. I learn through argument. Asking contrarian questions helps me learn. For me debate is all part the process of elucidation.

    Interesting that everyone side stepped my questions. Focused only on the negative. Only on my argumentative style. Did I not say anything worthwhile? Were all the points I brought up here and in my previous comments, particularly the philosophical points I brought up which were not in the least argumentative, not even worthy of discussion?

    Thanks a lot for just dismissing me as a troll, not even acknowledging me as a human being. I brought up some very valid points, but apparently every single one of them fell on deaf ears.

    And who the fuck is Ta-Wan?

    Textbook asshole.

    ReplyDelete
  12. @ Joy

    "I always considered blog comments to be for sharing brief insights (positive or negative) concerning the blog entry, not for challenging the poster to deep discussion.

    A forum is a more appropriate place for an ongoing discussion."

    I would agree that describes the majority of comments, but obviously I was leaning more in the other direction. I think a blog would be great for encouraging deeper discussions, I actually much prefer blogs to forums, primarily because of their more personal nature, but obviously Rambling Taoist doesn't want to take this blog in that direction, I have to respect that, but I think it's a shame. I feel somewhat cheated. If a blogger doesn't want to interact with their audience, isn't willing to engage in debate, and yet continues to blog about topics that are highly debatable and deeply philosophical concepts that would benefit from further discussion, I feel that he shouldn't even allow comments at all (and yeah I have read the comment disclaimer). Obviously he disagrees, but that's where I'm coming from.

    Personally not only do I love asking questions, I also love answering them, especially those of a more philosophical nature. What surprises me is that someone writing a philosophical piece wouldn't be eager to explore further questions of inquiry simply for the fun of it, that you would a be enthusiastic to keep conversation going. Obviously that's me, and I'm disappointed that he doesn't. That's also where I'm coming from here.

    ReplyDelete
  13. @Rambling Taoist

    "Nowhere in my comments did I say you were wrong."

    What I meant was that while I did imply it I didn't specifically say "YOU ARE WRONG".

    As a suggestion, maybe you ought to revise your comments disclaimer, stating that you do not allow debate, the asking of dissenting or contrarian questions, or any comment that challenges you to deeper discussion.

    Or you could always moderate your comments, and delete the ones you don't like, or better yet just deactivate them entirely, since you really don't seem very interested in human interaction anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Cym,
    Implied? Explicit? What difference does it make? The message is the same.

    Like I mentioned previously, you appear to live under the mantra, there is one correct way to do things -- YOUR WAY. If someone chooses not to go down your particular path, then you do what you've been doing these past few days: goad, insult, and engage in a virtual temper tantrum to try to manipulate others into playing your game solely by "Cym" rules.

    There are many ways to organize and manage a blog. Scott & I are happy with the way we've chosen. You aren't happy with it. That leaves you with three options: 1) Continue on your present course unabated, 2) Accept the fact our protocol isn't to your liking, but continue reading within those confines or 3) Find other blogs that satisfy your intense desire for debate.

    The choice is yours alone.

    ReplyDelete
  15. You are a very sick man, and unfortunately in your case, blogging only seems to be compounding the problem.

    Does your therapist know about this blog? Do you ever talk about it with them? You should.

    Only one correct way? No not really. I don't think that at all, although I do value openness and honesty and intellectual curiosity higher than the alternatives. So yeah I would consider those values to be a correct way, not the only way, but the opposite of those traits are not something I would ever advocate.

    What are you saying, that there is no right or wrong? That if there is more than one correct way, then by default that means there is no incorrect way at all, ever? Everyone is right, no one is wrong?

    If a guy insists on clinging to delusions and falsehoods and sharing them with others, he's just following his own path, and that makes it a healthy place to be, and people should just let him be?

    When you go to therapy, and you're talking about your problems, perhaps with anxiety, why don't you just tell your therapist, that your phobias and hallucinations are just, you know, your nature, that you're just following your path, why even seek therapy at all then?

    ReplyDelete
  16. Oh my god, I just realized that I have entered the Twilight Zone. I've been commenting on a blog which is primarily inhabited by autistics, who do not feel empathy, have difficulties with openness and honesty and communicating with others, and consequently place a very low value on human interaction.

    You could say that what I've been doing, and failing miserable at it, is akin to attempting to describe color or the objects of the world to a blind man who thinks he can see because he sees in his dreams.

    Obviously that is a losing proposition from the beginning.

    What the fuck was I thinking?

    But don't worry, for all those who dislike me, who have dismissed me as a troll, you won't have to be troubled by me any more after this post. I'm won't be reading your blog anymore, and the only reason why I have responded to these comments, is because they have been emailed to me, I am not going out of my way to read them on your blog.

    ReplyDelete

Comments are unmoderated, so you can write whatever you want.