From: jpak@oakhill.sps.mot.com (Jim Pak)
Subject: Re: Asian/Asian American Conflicts
Reply-To: jpak@manute.sps.mot.com
Organization: Motorola Inc.  Austin, Tx.
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 18:59:37 GMT

In article <1992Sep10.061313.19143@mumbo.apple.com> tse@loonybin.apple.com (Gary Tse) writes:
>>Gary, do you *really* believe you've never listened to anybody else's opinion?
>>Not in your entire life?  You live in a vacuum, right?
>
>kawakami's claim is not of action, but of rightness.

See, Gary, already I've lost you here.  I have no idea what you're talking
about here.  Here's John's quote:

>>But who in life is not defined in part by other people.  No one.  Only
>>a fool can shrug off the opinions of others as ultimately insignificant.

I don't know how you interpret that, but I interpret that to mean all people
listen to the opinions of others, at some level, at some point, some of the
time.  Not all of the time, but some of the time.  The person who doesn't
listen to the opinions of others even some of the time is a stubborn,
foolish person.

What's this talk of "action vs rightness"?  Is listening to the opinion of
others violating some unwritten law of "rightness"?  What's wrong with
listening to the opinion(s) of others?

>That we are all fools sometimes, that all of us sin, that none of us are
>gods, are givens.

OK.  Don't see what this has to do with anything, but ok.

>That we give credence to the opinions of others does not somehow sanctify 
>the act.  

Sanctify the act of what?  Listening to others?  Is there something wrong
with that?  What's so wrong with that?

Gary, don't mean to be unkind, but sometimes (often?) you couch your posts in
such high-falutin language that a peon like me doesn't get what you're trying
to say.  Please do me a favor here.  Speak plainly.

It's like that time you replied to Dwight's story about eating the cow chip
with your remark about, "You are required to be, not to live," or something
like that.  Stuff like that is way over my head.  I'm not William F. Buckley
or a professor of English literature.  I'm just me.  Please, keep that in
mind when you argue with me.  :-)

>James, I am offended.  I had hoped we had reached a point in our 
>relationship where you will not try to shift the point of argument.
>Guess not.  Sigh.

Well, sorry about that Gary, but to be perfectly truthful, a lot of times I
just can't follow what the hell you're saying.  Please, do me a favor.  I am
not joking here.  Explain your response to John's quote to me in plain,
simple English so that even I can understand what it is you're saying.  Are
you saying that listening to the opinions of others violates some unwritten
code of "rightness" in your book?  If not, let me know what you mean.  To be
honest, I get John's side of the argument.  I don't get yours.

If you'd rather e-mail it to me, go ahead, because right now, you make no
sense to me.

>[poem deleted]

Gary, nice poem, but again, what the heck did that have to do with our
argument?  :-)

>>Oh, and before you go off in your usual sarcastic tangent ...
>
>Oh no.  I will attempt no such thing.  I have discovered a bit ago
>that sarcasm is wasted here. 

OK.  Then tell you what.  I'll lay off arguing with you in the future, because
to be honest, I can't understand what you're trying to say.

You wouldn't happen to be a closet Brit, would you?  :-)  Because a lot of
times I have trouble understanding them, too.

Jim
Newsgroups: soc.culture.asian.american