Why Preach? |
Post Reply 
|
Page <1 7891011> |
| Author | |
Nokigon 
Postmaster General 
Player Council - Historian Joined: 07 Nov 2010 Status: Offline Points: 1452 |
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote Reply
 Posted: 23 Jan 2016 at 00:50 |
|
Oh Lord, we're now devolving into cheap shots over who's done more debating.
Ordinarily, I tend to avoid your philosophical diatribes, but I do tend to take issue when I witness self-declared intellectual superiority being used to insult a man whom I count as a friend. I had began to write out a very long rebuttal to your arguments, but then realised that what I wanted to say could be summarised very shortly. Your personal life experiences do not automatically qualify you to instruct others as to how their life should be led, nor does it qualify you to heap scorn on those (such as Belegar) who dared to challenge your opinion, simply because you assume your opinion is more valid/your skills of debate more effective. You are more than entitled to offer your opinion. However, understand that your opinion is in this instance solitary, and that the opinions of others can be equally worthwhile. The reason why preaching is potentially best avoided is because telling everyone else how to live their lives, regardless of how well-intentioned you are, is best avoided. I recognise the irony and hypocrisy in my previous statement; I reiterate that you are welcome to advance your opinion. I would merely suggest that you should be aware that others have a different experience to yours, and your experience does not necessarily qualify you to be a better debater or a more effective thinker than them. For that reason, and that reason alone, deriding the opinion of others by saying that you would "eat them for lunch" in a debate is not advisable. Incidentally, I was taught to debate by a former England WSDC coach, and Abstract's comment was in relation to KP's video.
|
|
 |
|
|
ajqtrz
Postmaster 
Joined: 24 May 2014 Location: USA Status: Offline Points: 500 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 23 Jan 2016 at 00:36 |
|
Belegar,
Well, how about that. I'm not sure were, in my comments, I "answered with insults, jokes." I'm re-reading it now and can't find any joke. The opening paragraph is a rebuttal of your claim that "nobody is interested" in high minded philosophy. I presented evidence to the contrary, evidence which actually disproves your point. That's debate, not insult or joking. You do have a very good point about my over the top reference to my debating experience. Upon reflection I do regret very much the display of hubris. The only 'excuse' I can offer is that I hate competitions where the contestants are unevenly matched AND I did not remember your background, which would be a very good match, indeed. For my stupidity I apologize. I got your point in the basketball analogy but countered with the claim that a basketball game is a closed venue, while each thread of the forum is independent and nobody has to "attend." Again, denying venue of an analogy is a typical debating tactic. You claimed a venue of a captive audience expecting a basketball game and I countered with a free audience expecting a philosophical discourse (only because they, I assume, know my style). As for a joke or insult, I see little in what I said. If you see in the paragraph about what I think you might think a debate should be as some form of insult, I apologize. The comment about what you might be envisioning could be read as an insult I guess, and if so I am truly sorry. It was not meant to be but was offered as a poorly worded distinction between a formal and informal debate format. Given all this I wonder if you might reconsider what you have written as it was, I think, rather harsh.. The debate I proposed was perfectly serious.
AJ |
|
|
|
|
ajqtrz
Postmaster
Joined: 24 May 2014 Location: USA Status: Offline Points: 500 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 23 Jan 2016 at 00:34 |
|
Fiona, since I'm not sure why Belegar is so upset I am not sure what trick I performed. Be that as it may, do you have anything to say about the subject at hand? Do you think it a good thing or bad for a person to speak up about philosophical things. I read your post and can't find the answer it. But of course I'm just being sarcastic, right?
And while I'm at it, I apologize if big words offend you. Sometimes though, little words can't convey large thoughts quite as clearly. My suggestion is that you keep a dictionary or use dictionary.com. By doing so you will not only understand what I'm saying more clearly, but also be truly able to correct me. Wouldn't that be nice. And now to respond to my friend, Belegar. |
|
|
|
|
Fiona
Wordsmith 
Joined: 02 Jul 2014 Status: Offline Points: 139 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 22 Jan 2016 at 16:35 |
|
Wow Congrats aj! You managed to alienate your biggest supporter. Belegar is the most loyal guy I know and somehow you managed to make him an enemy. That's a really neat trick. Perhaps your background in debate can make things right?
Also, When I think philosophical, I think Illyriad...I mean GC and the great debate over 7 food vs 5 food or (my favorite) what color is Aga's loin cloth. Gibberish spoken with large words is still gibberish. Good luck with your war of words... Fiona
|
|
|
|
|
Rill
Postmaster General
Player Council - Geographer Joined: 17 Jun 2011 Location: California Status: Offline Points: 6903 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 22 Jan 2016 at 05:15 |
|
I am not sure how trying to engage people in a philosophical discussion is harmful to them, so long as they have the freedom to not engage in it. I guess if one insisted on that being the only topic or demanded a response, then it would impair enjoyment of the game.
But it seems like all people have to do if they don't like aj's forum posts is not read them. Global chat is more of a fine line; although there is a block in chat function, it seems somewhat reasonable to defer to others at least some of the time in terms of their preference for chat topics, within the rules of chat. (Although discussion of the game itself would seem to be something that should always be appropriate.) I haven't seen aj spending a lot of time in global chat trying to engage people in long-winded philosophical discussions; perhaps I've missed those times. As for his posts here on the forum, I'm not sure why people are offended. As long as they are in the appropriate forum section, what's the big deal? Read them if you want to, reply if you want to. If you don't enjoy it, then partake in some other part of the forum. Speaking for myself, at least half the time, I couldn't care less about whatever aj is talking about. But it doesn't bother me that he's talking about it. It seems a little over the top to dictate that other people must care about anything that's posted here. I don't think I'd have the energy for all that caring anyway.
Edited by Rill - 22 Jan 2016 at 05:18 |
|
|
|
|
Belegar Ironhammer
Greenhorn 
Joined: 29 Mar 2014 Status: Offline Points: 91 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 22 Jan 2016 at 05:00 |
So let me get this straight. You posted in the forums about how you wanted to have a philosophical debate. When I offered a challenge along with my opening salvo, you answered with insults, jokes, and a laughable attempt at intimidation, basically encouraging me to quit now because you would eat my lunch. Thus, it seems you don't actually want to debate since you rejected my offer. Instead, as someone posted earlier, your missives are actually hubris laden attempts to inflate your already staggering ego. I thought your main reasons for opposing land claims were because the so-called insults, threats, and intimidation constituted bullying. But I guess when you act the exact same way, it is not bullying and perfectly acceptable. Though you are very hypocritical, making the rules up as you go along does have advantages, I suppose. I thought jokes, insults, and intimidation were all poor debate tactics? Not from you, evidently, because you are a college professor and you know everything and the rules do not apply to you. If you want a measuring contest, I too took debate in college and did mock trial where I had to defend positions before practicing attorneys and judges. I have spent the last 3 years having to stand my ground against the attorneys and judges who taught my law school classes. I've even written briefs in opposition to practicing attorneys and submitted them to judges in actual court proceedings. But yes, I am terrified of the college professor who teaches debate. You clearly missed my point with the basketball analogy which was that people do not play illy for the philosophy just as people don't go to a basketball game for a symphony. They may discuss a non-basketball event with another crowd member, but that is not why they came to the game. I thought someone of your dazzling intelligence could understand that. Seems I was wrong. Your insults and intimidation tactics are also borderline ad hominem attacks. Didn't you learn to avoid that in Debate 101? I think you need to retake that class, professor. Do you notice how I am mocking you and assuming motives like you did for me? It must really suck to be treated like everyone else. So come down from your ivory tower, dwell among us mere mortals and try to actually follow the rules you espouse. We can still debate if you like, but I don't have much interest in discourse with such a colossal hypocrite. Consider our friendship at an end. I'll see you in the newb ring.
|
|
|
|
|
ajqtrz
Postmaster
Joined: 24 May 2014 Location: USA Status: Offline Points: 500 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 21 Jan 2016 at 22:16 |
|
Abstractdream, I've never liked you more.
Though I'm not too sure what your question was about I thought I'd answer it anyway. AJ |
|
|
|
|
ajqtrz
Postmaster
Joined: 24 May 2014 Location: USA Status: Offline Points: 500 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 21 Jan 2016 at 22:13 |
|
asr, that's an interesting perspective. As a philosopher I do think that it's okay to agree with me and it's okay to disagree. I only ask if you agree or disagree, that you have done your homework. As I often say to my students, "your passion does not equal my persuasion."
As for preaching being done for the uneducated, I would amend it to preaching is to educate and we are all in need of more education. AJ |
|
|
|
|
ajqtrz
Postmaster
Joined: 24 May 2014 Location: USA Status: Offline Points: 500 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 21 Jan 2016 at 22:10 |
|
Belegar, as much as I respect you, I find your comments rather funny. First you say that Illy is a game where one can "trade, build, fight, explore, build friendships etc." and then exclude "high minded philosophical discourse" from the list because you "doubt" anybody wants to talk about such things? If you have been around long enough you know by example that that isn't true at all. I've seen and participated in some very interesting discussions in GC, and if people really aren't interested in "high minded philosophical discourse" why are so many of my threads in the top 10 or so all the time? I don't have to be liked to be listened to and if people are listening, even if the strongly disagree, they are engaged in those "high minded philosophical discourses" thus proving your your point to be false.
As for my preaching...almost all of it is here in the forums. I can's see anybody playing basketball in the threads I've posted so I guess your analogy is as about as lame as your claim that nobody wants to talk about "high minded philosophical discourse." As for a debate, I suspect one could be arranged, but I might warn you in advance that I've taught collegiate debate AND took second place in the national CEDA (Cross Examination Debate Association) Tournament when I was in college. In a formal debate I'd probably eat you for lunch if that is any indication of my skills. But of course you are probably just speaking of the informal type of debate where we trade barbs for a while, get off topic, circle around, go at it again and generally engage in a bare-fisted slug fest to see who is the most clever and fastest on his feet. I would rather we debate in a more leisurely manner in writing or a fully formal debate as proscribed by CEDA. As for the subject, perhaps something philosophical like: "Resolved: Since the players of Illyriad are real people the community should not allow bullying in any form." That would give you several avenues of attack and I would have several avenues of defense. Just be sure to bring whatever evidence you might be able to round up. AJ |
|
|
|
|
asr
Wordsmith
Joined: 22 Nov 2012 Status: Offline Points: 109 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 21 Jan 2016 at 19:14 |
|
For a philosopher its an insult if someone agrees with him, because preaching is done to educate the uneducated.
|
|
|
|
|
Post Reply
|
Page <1 7891011> |
Tweet
|
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Topic Options
ajqtrz wrote: