I'm sorry, but it's unlikely I'll ever speak of it again. keep to the Fen Causeway
However, I will not discuss the subject that Sven raised of personal legacy and what survives us. The diary is there but I have not looked at it since I lost it and will not respond if you comment. Nor will I respond anywhere else here, this is demonstrably not a safe forum for such issues. keep to the Fen Causeway
I keep hearing this but nobody seems able to come up with examples which would show that this is a significant tendency in ET. Could you give some actual examples of this "intolerance" - apart from Jerome's discouragement of discussion of astrology? :-) I'm sure you won't think such a request is "brutal", "trashing", etc. Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.
Questioning a person's perceptions or asking for them to explain or justify their perception is different from asking someone to justify a conclusion that is based on a process that clearly involves a separation between subject and object. It can seem that the appropriateness of the emotional response or of the perception itself is being questioned. This type of questioning can be helpful or can be used to simply stop discussion of a given subject, but, regardless, it requires considerable effort to respond. This is in part due to the question being posed from a frame of reference different from that in which the discourse was being conducted. A truly forthcoming answer requires one to develop a translation between reference frames where one frame may contain dimensions not found in the other. This is a worthy goal, but enduring work can still be done in different areas that have not been tied together into a unified whole, such as has been the case in the 20th century with thermodynamics electrodynamics in physics.
When such questioning comes to be the expected response any time certain subjects are discussed, as with Chris Cook, who anticipates "obligatory fisticuffs with HiD" any time a discussion of possible commodity market manipulation arises, one may wonder whether the discussion is a quest for truth and understanding or is, instead, a struggle over the perceived limits and nature of the bounds of reality. I think R.D. Laing might have referred to this as "the politics of reality."
Another approach might be to grant the authenticity of the perceptions of others, at least provisionally, especially when many individuals have similar perceptions. I would estimate that there may be at least eight or ten people who regularly post comments and/or diaries who, at least for some of their perceptions, operate from a frame of reference different from that of the physical sciences. Is it not a bit Procrustian to expect them to spend half of their efforts in those discussions responding to questions arising from a different frame of reference? As the Dutch said while fighting the Spanish: "It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."
this ('overlooking' repressive power inequalities being a subset of these inequalities) is a subject worth exploring closer, especially how it operates (both as top- and underdog) in our own experience in our own lives
Reason is, that when combined with
degrees to which repressive power inequalities inflict suffering are closely tied to levels of consciousness.
these level develop, as indicated by developmental psychology. On http://www.kheper.net/integral/psychology.html there's an interesting story on this
there's much to say about this, but I don't want to elaborate now, also since much has been written on the subject already
Questioning a person's perceptions or asking for them to explain or justify their perception is different from asking someone to justify a conclusion that is based on a process that clearly involves a separation between subject and object. It can seem that the appropriateness of the emotional response or of the perception itself is being questioned.
Yes, but the key point is that nobody even questioned Helen's "perception" nor her emotional response, let alone "bullied" her, etc., despite her claim that they did.
So this point, which I have myself endorsed, is also irrelevant:
Another approach might be to grant the authenticity of the perceptions of others, at least provisionally, especially when many individuals have similar perceptions.
Yet again we don't have any actual examples of the alleged "intolerance" in ET. Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.
You frequently insist on pushing your view too forcefully in the name of 'robust' debate. Not everybody wants to engage in argument or debates on the same terms that you do. Please try to recognise that. Ad astra per aspera
If Helen (or anybody else) feels bullied or intimidated by the way the discussion unfolded, can you not entertain the thought that maybe sometimes you should step back even if you cannot quite understand the point of view?
Not when she begins the personal attacks - about a comment on Crazy Horse's comment, not on her diary as such, travesties even reasonable requests, to someone else, for some evidence, as "brutal", "trashing", "interrogation", etc. If anyone was adopting a bullying tone it was her and in fact afew suggested to her that it had gone far enough. Nor do I find her claim that she feels bullied plausible when I see that she attempts to play the victim with others - cf. afew saying recently that she was "laying out a false grievance" - as she clearly was.
You frequently insist on pushing your view too forcefully in the name of 'robust' debate. Not everybody wants to engage in argument or debates on the same terms that you do. Please try to recognise that.
"pushing" is a loaded term and "too forcefully" is a matter of opinion - any examples? I don't think my comments are any more "forceful" than those of many people here - we are adults. Helen herself said she could be "robust" in her own defence in reply to afew's suggestion that it had gone far enough. Nobody is obliged to engage in arguments or debates with me, but if they do I will try to present my arguments as well as I can - I don't consider that "pushing" and I don't usally do it so "forcefully" that I use terms like "brutal" etc. if others merely ask me for some evidence to support my claims. I just try to supply the requested evidence. Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.
afew suggested to her that it had gone far enough
What I said at that point concerned the exchange between you, not Helen alone. It was obviously heading for the wall, and I wanted to try to calm it down without pulling out the front-pager hat (because that drives otherwise reasonable people mad).
we don't have any actual examples of the alleged "intolerance" in ET.
The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence. keep to the Fen Causeway
(i also wonder whether a blog can be said to have a 'tendency' per se - it's like saying artists tend to be leftwing; some do, some do not, generalizing doesn't have that much relevance*, I guess; if there is intolerance or insensibility, it's of this and that person)
*except if this blog actually has a "line" - established by its owners/moderators - that I'm not aware of... Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last! (Martin Luther King)
Unfortunately the search function on ET doesn't work, and so it can be extremely difficult to find examples which prove the point I was making. (also my memory for the exact context of a remark is often poor).
However I do recall several members being chased away, some permanently, and others having extremely hurt feelings after some very bruising experiences. This sometimes involves ad hominem attacks, sometimes just sneering or sarcastic comments, and more often just a dismissal of the point of view being taken.
A very minor recently example effecting me would be a comment on my last diary: poemless:
But seriously, this is an oversimplification and does not really illustrate an appreciation for the relationship between people and their leaders outside the world of Hollywood cartoons.
Having spent a lifetime studying "the relationship between people and their leaders" I didn't take kindly to being attacked for having a cartoon level of appreciation of such relationships especially as I didn't see any evidence being produced to justify that assertion.
I don't want to make a big deal of that example -it was at the very minor end of things - but it was recent enough for me to find the direct source without undue difficulty. What disturbs me more is that I have come across quite a few ET members now -in off-line conversations - who have felt extremely hurt at one time or another. I have been there myself and was shocked at the lack of understanding of best practice dispute resolution procedures and fair process I encountered.
I don't want to go there again either, except to say that I still think ET is, on balance, one of the best sites for civil discourse around. That doesn't stop me looking for a better one, and if I find one I won't be hanging around, because I don't see any recognition of the problem, or progress being made in improving this aspect of ET. notes from no w here
It was the type of exchange that I enjoy - perhaps influenced by the fact that it is a subject about which I know something and in which I am interested ;-) But similarly 'toned' exchanges have taken place on other non-standard themes and they all add to the richness of ET imo. You can't be me, I'm taken
Unfortunately the search function on ET doesn't work, and so it can be extremely difficult to find examples which prove the point I was making.
You can always google a specifik site by adding it as a search term. For example a google search containing site:eurotrib.com will only give you results on ET.
Often this is superior to sites own search functions. A vote for PES is a vote for EPP! A vote for EPP is a vote for PES! Support the coalition, vote EPP-PES in 2009!
Oops - I just googled my own name in Eurorib and it came up with 12k results. No it can't be. It can't be! I'm not that sad to have contributed 12k comments am I? notes from no w here
An inhouse search function wouldn't have such problem ; it could also be possible to use robot.txt to tell google to only index certain pages, and not others, but at the risk of losing some referrals, i.e. links that wouldn't go to those pages. I also have the impression that Scoop's URL have duplication (i.e. the same page can be accessed through various URLs), which is bad for a good ranking. Indeed, "numbered" URLs are bad from this point of view, too ; that's a secondary feature request for ET 2.0. Un roi sans divertissement est un homme plein de misères
European Tribune
. Home . About . Contact . New User Guide . FAQ . Search . Search (Google) . Archives (Wiki)
A very minor recently example effecting me would be a comment on my last diary: poemless: But seriously, this is an oversimplification and does not really illustrate an appreciation for the relationship between people and their leaders outside the world of Hollywood cartoons. Having spent a lifetime studying "the relationship between people and their leaders" I didn't take kindly to being attacked for having a cartoon level of appreciation of such relationships especially as I didn't see any evidence being produced to justify that assertion.
You expected evidence Frank ? !! You implicitly impose a rationalist framework ! :-) Given there was no evidence to support the comment why take it so seriously ? Why not just ask for the evidence ? - but be prepared to duck if you do so here :-) Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.
Indeed (though I wasn't referring to a "positivist" one) and the request for evidence is seen as entirely reasonable in many areas. Cf. "someone"'s comment for the dangers of not relying on evidence. Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.
ET can be as bigoted as anywhere
You have this habit of writing out exaggerations that somehow seem plausible. I haven't seen anyone question Helen's trans status here - I think there is a near universal off-limits / respect for what people do with their life and their person on this site. Beliefs and views, though, are completely open to attack and debate. That's not bigotry - at worst it's a lack of emotional intelligence, and even then, there are no rules on discourse on this site.
you are the media you consume.
It's not a detail. It seems to me (Helen is free to see things otherwise, of course), that it's the biggest part of the picture.
My complaint was; the first discussion I entered into on this thread was with Sven. It began to move into areas where, on a previous diary, I had felt exposed and vulnerable and felt bullied and harrassed. That may have been an unfair reading of events but I was reacting emotionally due to exposure etc and so I brought the discussion with Sven to a close with a not so oblique explanation which was accepted by those participating.
Then all hell broke loose and I withdrew from the conversation as I still feel quite raw about what had happened and did not want to go through it all again for other's purposes. That conversation has continued without me and I was happy as it didn't distract from the very much more germane discussion I was having at the back of the thread.
I am enjoying the conversations I am having, I hope you are enjoyiing yours too, but I haven't really followed yours at all (sorry, I really don't want to know what some people think about me). However, I noticed your comment as I was paging by and thought I should clarify a couple of points as I feel you've sufferend a minor misapprehension of how it all started. keep to the Fen Causeway
I have barely put in two brief comments here, precisely to correct misapprehensions.
