... its why debate exists.
It strikes me that debate is to convince observers of a position. Too often, especially in the current cultural climate, debaters quickly switch from logic to insult. In fact, the argument looks much weaker when it is degraded to insult rather than by a convincing argument.
It's too bad (in this transactional world) that empathy must be received in order to be given. This, in fact, seems to be the antithesis of empathy. Likewise, it's unfortunate that respect for others is dependent on their actions rather than one's own. In my view, degrading another is never warranted
... its why debate exists.
It strikes me that debate is to convince observers of a position. Too often, especially in the current cultural climate, debaters quickly switch from logic to insult. In fact, the argument looks much weaker when it is degraded to insult rather than by a convincing argument.
It's too bad (in this transactional world) that empathy must be received in order to be given. This, in fact, seems to be the antithesis of empathy. Likewise, it's unfortunate that respect for others is dependent on their actions rather than one's own. In my view, degrading another is never warranted
... its why debate exists.It strikes me that debate is to convince observers of a position. Too often, especially in the current cultural climate, debaters quickly switch from logic to insult. In fact, the argument looks much weaker when it is degraded to insult rather than by a convincing argument.It's too bad (in this transactional world) that empathy must be received in order to be given. This, in fact, seems to be the antithesis of empathy. Likewise, it's unfortunate that respect for others is dependent on their actions rather than one's own. In my view, degrading another is never warranted
As youve quoted me Ill assume your comments are directed at me.
If you read my opening post to the OP, you will read in the first line I showed empathy.
I then tried to explain our experiences from the opposite view of his own, using our wide travels to emphasise that experience.
This was met with utter contempt from him.
If someone on a nudist website calls himself Take A Ruler To It, then I think its a legitimate question to ask what it means. Does not you?
StevieLorna wrote:If empathy is given then empathy is reciprocated.If contempt is shown then respect is withheld.If avoiding a question is preferred then some sarcasm is warranted.Disagree if you like, its why debate exists.
Agree with the first two statements, but not the third. Some people will avoid a question because they find it personally sensitive to them. (If I had been raped as a child, the question "Why can't we be closer friends?" might trigger some associations that are better left untouched. So my reaction might well be to avoid the question.) In this case, the empathy has to be given by you.
Agree with the first two statements, but not the third. Some people will avoid a question because they find it personally sensitive to them. (
I agree with you Woodsman, but I was asking a very specific question about his name. Nothing to do with any deeper personal childhood trauma.
The name, TakeARuleToIt, I was asking what the It was he wanted measured?
If its his chosen name to be known by here I think its a legitimate question, which was avoided.
Actions
Back to TopicsReply to TopicShare this topic
Get paid just by sending us users/traffic.
Signup takes seconds, start now!
Signup as an affiliate!