From: kvt@druwa.ATT.COM (KVT)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.vietnamese
Subject: Re: [POL] Re: DIALOG(Thua^.t hoa`i)
Date: 22 Dec 92 21:36:11 GMT
Reply-To: kvt@druwa.ATT.COM (KVT)

In article <1992Dec18.033828.18873@smsc.sony.com> tin@smsc.sony.com (Le Tin) writes:
# In article <22929@drutx.ATT.COM> kvt@druwa.ATT.COM (KVT) writes:
# >Thinh Nguyen  wrote:
# >
# >In article <1992Dec16.025728.17899@news.media.mit.edu> groucho!thinh@uu.psi.com writes:
# ># .... 
# ># It made me sick when one side "liberated" them in 1975 and now the 
# ># other side who are safely in the US still talking about "liberated" 
# ># them again.
# ># ...
# ># 
# ># I, and everyone else for that matter, can not say as fact what Vietnamese 
# ># culture is. I stated that Vietnamese judge people for their intention 
# ># because that is what I think. If you can express your opinions on various subjects, 
# ># I am equaly entitle to stated mine. If you think otherwise, then explain so.
# ># 
# ># To use a small mistake I made (at this point, I still remember clearly my 
# ># teacher told me 22 years ago that the two sentences was from NCT to express 
# ># his bitterness for his up and down carrer but I take anh La^m's word that 
# ># he is right) to discredit what I said will only show what kind of person 
# ># you are. This nitpicking is pathetic. It's got nothing remotely to do with 
# ># the point. You certainly can do much better than this. Have a nice day.
# ># 
# ># Thi.nh ngo.c Nguye^~n
# >
# >
# >Reading the above as a whole, I'm glad that Thinh Nguyen showed his 
# >contentions on the issues we've been talking about was ONLY HIS OPINIONS,
# >therefore not to be contested or jugded as whether they should be taken 
# >seriously. We could have saved much typing and reading if he has said
# >so much earlier. On the other hand, I start realizing why his "sickness"
# >or "tired" has anything to do with these issues. It probably has
# >something more to do with his own well-being than anybody else's.
# >
# >Kim
# 
# 
#   Please stay with the issue and stay away from personal attacks.
# It had looked like everyone was doing so well too.  Thi.nh and T.Tran
# are trying very hard at keeping the discussion at a high level.  They
# deserve the courtesy from everyone to do the same.
# 
#   We have had problems before when people lose their temper.  If you
# feel the need to do so, please keep it off SCV.
# 

Yes, what I wrote about Thinh Nguyen is an attack on his characters: 
a question on his personal integrity in the way he went about 
presenting and defending his arguments. It's a question of integrity
when Thinh can use personal distastes ("sick", "tired") as 
a way to refute other people's reasoning while others are trying to be 
logical. It's a question of integrity when Thinh can reserse high 
moral ground when he can accuse others with "pathetic" and 
"nit-picking" when confronted with proofs that he made a mistake. 
It's a question of integrity when Thinh claims personal opinion as
a way to stay away from a losing point: he does not have to justify
his statements.

By doing these things, Thinh had a unfair edge in this debate: He 
can claim things as facts or general consensus unless being proved
otherwise. But if confronted with evidence, he can claim high moral
ground as a way to not answer to evidence. Either way, his opponents
will be at disadvantage. If they don't object, Thinh can claim speaking
"the truth". If they object with reasoning, they can be ridiculed with
"tired", "sick" and "you can do better than this." In such debates, 
his opponents face a losing proposition: if they debate with integrity,
they have to filter out personal distastes and concentrate much harder 
on the issues; if they use the same tactics, they loose their 
integrity; if they are silent, they are perceived as giving up; or as 
I did, refuse to continue the debate and risk being seen as "lost 
temper, personal attack, low level". With such proposition, I'd rather 
risk the accusations than the energy that can be used more 
productively elsewhere. 

Kim

P.S. in my opinion, "pathetic" is not exactly a "courteous" word 
and "what kind of person you are" is not "high level" talking.