From: kraus@.SanDiego.NCR.COM (Dave Kraus)
Newsgroups: sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Insults
Date: 24 Nov 92 01:30:16 GMT
Article-I.D.: donner.1992Nov24.013016.13516
Reply-To: kraus@cheers.SanDiego.NCR.COM (Dave Kraus)
Organization: NCR Corporation, Rancho Bernardo

In article <1992Nov23.152720@IASTATE.EDU> danwell@IASTATE.EDU (Daniel A Ashlock) writes:
>In article <1992Nov23.171244.26285@donner.SanDiego.NCR.COM>,
>kraus@.SanDiego.NCR.COM (Dave Kraus) writes:
>
>                       [endless discussion deleted]
> 
>> It also might help to ignore the adolescent attacks of a person who strives
>> to drag conversations into the mud. To substitute attack for intelligent
>> discourse and thereby demonstrating lack of self control sure isn't going
>> to help teach anyone how to grow up. What you've got to realize is that
>> its a two way street. There are adolescents on both sides. Those who
>> relish in hurting others by changing the subject with personal attacks, and
>> those who haven't got the internal strength to maturely handle such attacks.
>
>   Still beating that same tin pot, eh, Dave?  If you are such a mature and
>honest debater why on earth did it take three weeks and twenty five responses
>for Cark Luydik(sp?) and I to drag out your admission,
>
>    "I do not beleive it is possible to tell a psychic from a con man[1]" ?

This is not about me Dan. Here is a prime example of someone stooping
to the personal level. Why are you getting so defensive?
  
>> Do you really feel that the only problem is that we have got a bunch of
>> whiners out there? Do you really think that the use of insults also does
>> not reflect an adolescent approach to discussion?
>
>   For the 10^5th time: the insults are a secondary or tertiary line of defense
>against poeple who waffle, equivocate, duck, dodge, change the subject, deny
>the reality of the game after agreeing to play, etc. etc.  Yourself, for
>example.

Why can't you show them when they waffle, duck,dodge, etc. Why attack?
What does it accomplish? Are you saying that using insults is the mature
way to handle people who duck issues?

Rick talks about the immaturity of those who are over-sensitive to insults.
My point is that it is also immature to use insults as a method of argument.
It is as simple as that. I'm not interested in all your explanations of why
people insult others. The point is that it is immature. Do you disagree?
Try to stick to the point this time.

>
>> Dave.Kraus@SanDiego.NCR.COM                       |
>> (619) 485-2504                                    |
>
>Dave, this is the .sig I insulted you into adopting.  No assinine 
>paranormalist quotes or anything.  Does this mean you don't have
>the maturity to handle the attacks?  If not, why cave in to my
>immature adolescent behavior?

My maturity is not at issue here. If in fact I have caved in to your immature
behavior, that doesn't all of a sudden make your behavior mature, does it?

>   The key point here is that you beleive in something improbable 
>because of unrepeatable personal experiences and are thrashing about 
>trying to find something to justify them  This is all fine; except that
>you do it ON SCI.SKEPTIC.  Nuff said.

Again, way off the subject. I actually find it interesting to converse
in this newsgroup. I don't really expect to win anybody over to what I believe.
I hope that some of what I say registers on a few minds out there. I take
pride in the fact that at one point I actually shamed you into having
a rational discussion with me awhile back. I know its really hard for you
to make it through any discussion without bringing your opponent's
personality into question.


---------------------------------------------------
Dave.Kraus@SanDiego.NCR.COM                       |
(619) 485-2504                                    |
---------------------------------------------------