[OT] The art of arguing

Just saw this posted to another newsgroup. For some reason, I thought it would be good to post here as well, although I won't use any names. :-) Apologies for the off-topic post. USENET Rules To Live By: I made it a rule to forbear all direct contradictions to the sentiments of others, and all positive assertion of my own. I even forbade myself the use of every word or expression in the language that imported a fixed opinion, such as "certainly", "undoubtedly", etc. I adopted instead of them "I conceive", "I apprehend", or "I imagine" a thing to be so or so; or "so it appears to me at present". When another asserted something that I thought an error, I denied myself the pleasure of contradicting him abruptly, and of showing him immediately some absurdity in his proposition. In answering I began by observing that in certain cases or circumstances his opinion would be right, but in the present case there appeared or seemed to me some difference, etc. I soon found the advantage of this change in my manner; the conversations I engaged in went on more pleasantly. The modest way in which I proposed my opinions procured them a readier reception and less contradiction. I had less mortification when I was found to be in the wrong, and I more easily prevailed with others to give up their mistakes and join with me when I happened to be in the right. -- Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin -- L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.sc.edu) | Deja Fu - http://www.math.sc.edu/~sjohnson | The feeling that things have Graphics Specialist and V:TES Rulemonger | been this FU'ed before.

On Wed, 18 Oct 2000 13:01:08 -0400, "L. Scott Johnson" <sjoh...@math.sc.edu> wrote: >Just saw this posted to another newsgroup. For some reason, I >thought it would be good to post here as well, although I won't >use any names. :-) *snort* Just because I didn't out you on the starter box thing... =) >Apologies for the off-topic post. ... is flamery ever truly off-topic on USENET? >USENET Rules To Live By: > >I made it a rule to forbear all direct contradictions to the >sentiments of others, and all positive assertion of my own. >I even forbade myself the use of every word or expression in >the language that imported a fixed opinion, such as "certainly", >"undoubtedly", etc. I adopted instead of them "I conceive", >"I apprehend", or "I imagine" a thing to be so or so; or >"so it appears to me at present". Hm. So instead, I should say "I apprehend that you appear to be unable to read the English language; therefore, I shall restate my point using words of no more than two syllables"? =) >When another asserted something that I thought an error, I >denied myself the pleasure of contradicting him abruptly, >and of showing him immediately some absurdity in his proposition. >In answering I began by observing that in certain cases or >circumstances his opinion would be right, but in the present >case there appeared or seemed to me some difference, etc. "Should the moon abruptly fall from the skies, I conceive that your opinion would, indeed, have much validity. Nevertheless, it shines brightly above us this eve, and so I am afraid that you may well be full of shit." >I soon found the advantage of this change in my manner; >the conversations I engaged in went on more pleasantly. >The modest way in which I proposed my opinions procured them >a readier reception and less contradiction. I had less >mortification when I was found to be in the wrong, and I Oh, now THERE's where the oops lies! He was actually wrong every so often. It's much easier to just not be wrong. (And I don't know WHAT Spying Mission you're speaking of.) >more easily prevailed with others to give up their mistakes >and join with me when I happened to be in the right. This is indeed the USENET, where true "prevailing" is only likely to happen by vigorously DoS'ing the opposing party's news server during the time he usually posts until the articles have expired. Failing that, it is to a large degree just stretching one's rhetoric. =) (Which is illegal in twelve states, even if you do it in your own house with the blinds down.) -- Derek "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge." - C. Darwin, 1871

"L. Scott Johnson" wrote: > Just saw this posted to another newsgroup. For some reason, I > thought it would be good to post here as well, although I won't > use any names. :-) > > Apologies for the off-topic post. > > USENET Rules To Live By: > > I made it a rule to forbear all direct contradictions to the > sentiments of others, and all positive assertion of my own. > I even forbade myself the use of every word or expression in > the language that imported a fixed opinion, such as "certainly", > "undoubtedly", etc. I adopted instead of them "I conceive", > "I apprehend", or "I imagine" a thing to be so or so; or > "so it appears to me at present". > > When another asserted something that I thought an error, I > denied myself the pleasure of contradicting him abruptly, > and of showing him immediately some absurdity in his proposition. > In answering I began by observing that in certain cases or > circumstances his opinion would be right, but in the present > case there appeared or seemed to me some difference, etc. > > I soon found the advantage of this change in my manner; > the conversations I engaged in went on more pleasantly. > The modest way in which I proposed my opinions procured them > a readier reception and less contradiction. I had less > mortification when I was found to be in the wrong, and I > more easily prevailed with others to give up their mistakes > and join with me when I happened to be in the right. > > -- Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin What complete and utter BULLSHIT!!! :) Fred

Frederick Scott wrote in message <39EE3E57...@netcom.com>... >What complete and utter BULLSHIT!!! :) > >Fred From your response, I must assume you are a plebian butthead and must now take a position directly opposite of yours and never agree with anything you say, regardless of how logical or illogical (yes!yes!) your viewpoint may be. Sir, I must also ask you if your eyesight is deteriorating due to some embarassing social disease or if you have attended referee school. Whack a doo ;-p Mike Ooi Insane Prince of Houston, TX Home of the functionally-named Houston Texans NFL Team sh...@texas.net

Mike Ooi wrote: > Frederick Scott wrote in message <39EE3E57...@netcom.com>... > >What complete and utter BULLSHIT!!! :) > > > >Fred > > From your response, I must assume you are a plebian butthead and must now > take a position directly opposite of yours and never agree with anything you > say, regardless of how logical or illogical (yes!yes!) your viewpoint may > be. Sir, I must also ask you if your eyesight is deteriorating due to some > embarassing social disease or if you have attended referee school. > > Whack a doo ;-p Damn. I'm pretty sure I've been insulted but in terms too vague for me to completely comprehend. Fortunately, however, I happen to come from a long line of plebian buttheads so that mutes the resentment a bit... Fred

On Thu, 19 Oct 2000, Frederick Scott wrote: > > From your response, I must assume you are a plebian butthead and must now > > take a position directly opposite of yours and never agree with anything you > > say, regardless of how logical or illogical (yes!yes!) your viewpoint may > > be. Sir, I must also ask you if your eyesight is deteriorating due to some > > embarassing social disease or if you have attended referee school. > > Damn. I'm pretty sure I've been insulted but in terms too vague for me > to completely comprehend. You find "butthead" vague? -- James Coupe | PGP Key 0x5D623D5D "And all the while I'm thinking things that I can never share with him. I'm a bundle of confusion, yet it has a strange appeal. Did it all begin with him and the way he makes me feel?"