|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
 Posted - 08/13/2004 : 07:34:51 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Renae
Your defense of the charge of ageism? I don't recall reading it (this is a rather long thread), but if you don't believe yourself to be, then fine. You know that people's cognitive skills sometimes change (and decline) as they age, sometimes through "natural" processes (lack of use) and sometimes through disease (ie dementia, Alzheimer's, etc.) You know this, of course. To hold a 70-year old, whose health (mental or otherwise) you know nothing about to a standard befitting a 30-year old feels wrong to me. It doesn't to you, which is fine.
Renea,
Your contact with seniors is quite different than mine. I have met people who have sharper minds at 70 than most 30 year olds. Heck, I'm related to some. I had a great aunt who was driving (speeding, really) until she was 94. She was a nurse until she retired in her 70's. She was sharp as a tack, but if you made an unsupported assertation about healthcare or a subject which she was knowledgable about, you'd better damn well be able to support what you said.
Absolutlely, minds and bodies deteriorate over time. Logical discourse does not take this into account, nor should it as the age of the speaker has no bearing on the content of the arguement. If the content of the arguement is invalid and the individual is presenting themselves as a "Johnny Appleseed of critical thinking", then they damn well better use the skills that critical thinking contains. Otherwise, instead of apple seeds of critical thinking, they sow apple seed shaped rocks of error.
Dave is attempting to show coberst how invalid his method is by posting assertations which are challenged and then declining to support them. Coberst goes so far as to claim oppression based on disagreements. Have the members here gotten fed up with a self-proclaimed harbringer of critical thought that does not use the concepts that critical thought entails, you bet. Is this ageism, no. We don't care what age he is. While mental and physical decline may explain his method, it does not excuse it.
|
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
 |
|
|
tomk80
SFN Regular
Netherlands
1278 Posts |
Posted - 08/13/2004 : 09:23:28 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Renae
Your defense of the charge of ageism? I don't recall reading it (this is a rather long thread), but if you don't believe yourself to be, then fine. You know that people's cognitive skills sometimes change (and decline) as they age, sometimes through "natural" processes (lack of use) and sometimes through disease (ie dementia, Alzheimer's, etc.) You know this, of course. To hold a 70-year old, whose health (mental or otherwise) you know nothing about to a standard befitting a 30-year old feels wrong to me. It doesn't to you, which is fine.
I'd like to jump in on this one just a little bit. The way you are stating you arguments here, it seems to me that you're saying we should go easy on Coberst because he might be mentally less able. For me, to start from this assertion is disrespectfull to say the least.
It is also contrary to my experience with elderly. All my grandparents (except my mother's mother unfortunately) have lived or are still alive up to an age well over 70. I regularly had and have debates with all of them, attacking them on their positions if I think it to be justified. These discussions are still fruitfull for both sides, and I think my grandparents would not be happy if they suspected I'd go easy on them because of their age. They'd probably be insulted, since their minds still fully functional and there to be made use of, whereas there bodies start to give in other ways.
I think the attitude you seem to be propagating is disrespectfull in the same way as saying, 'he is still young, he doesn't know any better' is disrespectfull. Just my $0.02. |
Tom
`Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, `if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic.'
-Through the Looking Glass by Lewis Caroll- |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 08/13/2004 : 09:27:31 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Renea:
I understand your intent was to get him to change.
Actually, I think it was to alert us to the fact that there is a new kind of troll taking up bandwidth and wasting a whole lot of peoples time. I think it is beyond any of us to get him to change...
By the way, Renea. I respect your opinions and I enjoy most of your posts. I just kinda think that this time your wrong. We have no choice but to agree to disagree.
I think every point possible has been made by all parties engaged in this particular part of the debate.
In my opinion, it is time to let it go... |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26021 Posts |
Posted - 08/13/2004 : 11:24:24 [Permalink]
|
Sorry, Kil, but there's stuff below which I think needs to be said...
Renae wrote:quote:
Why did I use the word stalking? Because to track someone that closely and document them that way is a little, well, weird to me. If you'd done it to me, I would have been a little nervous. (I knew your intent wasn't to harm coberst or create a cyber love affair.)
Really, what would have been freaky is if I'd compiled a complete list of every post he'd ever written, including dates and times, cross-referenced them, and did a "traffic study" of how many replies each post got, with agreement/disagreement ratios, and then worked up a nice PowerPoint presentation of it all with pie charts and graphs. That would have been weird, and seriously overboard.quote:
I understand your intent was to get him to change. Perhaps he is uninterested in changing for the young whippersnappers of the world. If so, I understand. 
He seems uninterested in changing for the 65-year-olds of the world, too.quote:
Why did I use the word "idiot"? Because my impression, after reading the OP, was that you believed coberst to be an idiot. ("Idiot" being shorthand (imprecise) for foolish nutcase.)
No, I believe coberst to be an egotistical and somewhat paranoid fanatic. The problem is, he brings those particular quirks to a subject about which I am passionate. He and I share mostly the same goals regarding critical thinking, I just think he's going about trying to reach those goals in all the wrong ways (and doing so loudly). And when an attempt is made to engage him on that point, he begins flinging thinly-disguised insults.quote:
Your defense of the charge of ageism? I don't recall reading it (this is a rather long thread), but if you don't believe yourself to be, then fine. You know that people's cognitive skills sometimes change (and decline) as they age, sometimes through "natural" processes (lack of use) and sometimes through disease (ie dementia, Alzheimer's, etc.) You know this, of course. To hold a 70-year old, whose health (mental or otherwise) you know nothing about to a standard befitting a 30-year old feels wrong to me. It doesn't to you, which is fine.
I believe it to be presumptive to assume that a person who claims to be a "senior scholar" and a "Critical Thinker" has some sort of decreased cognitive ability. The only evidence of mental defect I see in coberst is what I've outlined previously (egotism, paranoia, and fanaticism), none of which imply a loss of intelligence, only sociopathy (which can strike at any age). I think it is an example of ageism to assume cognitive degradation prior to its being in evidence for any individual. In general, yes, older people tend to be less "quick" than the young, but this particular older person was proudly huffing about being a grade-A thinker.quote:
I've never understood why people here often become indignant when someone doesn't respond specifically to everything they say. I sometimes don't catch all questions directed to me, Dave. Sometimes I'm too busy. Sometimes I don't know what to say. Sometimes I see their point as valid but don't acknowledge it to avoid wasting bandwith. Sometimes I'm just not reading closely.
Frankly, I've been feeling attacked. By you. It's upsetting when my counter-arguments and defense appear to be ignored, while you're actively responding to other people in the same thread.quote:
I'm the only person on this thread who has apologized or admitted any bad behavior, yet I'm the bad guy?
No, I just think you don't get the point. That's not, in itself, a "bad guy" characteristic.quote:
You post a demeaning thread to another poster, and you're the victim? Sorry, but I'm confused.
Okay: I and others have been personally and indirectly villified by coberst as "hecklers," "close-minded," "blind," or worse for well over a month now, and our only initial offenses were to point out weaknesses in coberst's arguments, or to ask him to support his premises. He has prompted a tremendous waste of time across at least six message boards, as dozens of people tried to engage him in discussion, mostly to be blown off or insulted. So, yeah: I'm a victim of coberst's crappy behaviour. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
N C More
Skeptic Friend
53 Posts |
Posted - 08/13/2004 : 12:42:38 [Permalink]
|
Just in case anyone here missed how coberst deals with those who disagree with him I offer this:
quote:
It appears that the normal human response to a new meme is to take the turtle position. Because this position is somewhat irrational the neophobic choose to attack the messenger. If you notice most replies are negative and attack replies. One can easily see that the attacker makes no effort to understand the issue at hand. This an't rocket science. Anyone who wishes can easily develop an understanding of the issue if they wish. There are none so blind as he who will not see
The whole post can be viewed here.
I agree with Dave, this isn't a very nice way to deal with people. |
"An open mind is like an open window...without a good screen you'll get some really weird bugs!" |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
