Re: virus: The "science" of John Schneid?

Autumn / Shatterglass (
Sun, 15 Dec 1996 00:13:23 PST

Thank you, Martin. This XYZ fellow has become tiresome in my opinion, as
well. Perhaps if we as a whole simply ignore him he will be bright
enough to take the hint and either contribute debate with meaning, or
questions from honest curiosity rather than the desire to be
argumentative and insulting. Perhaps I am also an optimist.

I have "lurked" on this list for some time now, and feel that I can say
with certainty than none of those here lack intelligence. I would
include XYZ in my estimation. What this individual needs to learn is the
difference between intellectual debate on a topic and the
smoke-and-mirrors of argument conducted for it's own sake. To resort to
insulting your opponent contributes nothing to your position, and in
most circumstances fails to endear you to those whose opinions you are
trying to sway. If anything, it simply makes you appear more foolish
than you are.

Any system of belief worthy of the name should encourage the doubters and
the Devil's Advocates to have their say. To defend your position with
reason and skill solidifies your own understanding of it. In that spirit
then, XYZ and others of differing opinion should be welcomed... But when
discourse turns to pettiness and child-like rounds of "Did Not/Did Too"
it is time to step back and remember our original concerns. We are
intelligent adults discussing an aesthetic/scientific philosophy of
ideas. We should remain so, believers and doubters alike.

Forgive my rambling. Perhaps it is not my place to define who and what we
should be, and how we should conduct our discussions and debates, but I
firmly believe that we as a whole are better for remembering our
civility and regard for the intellects of those around us... No matter
which side of an issue they may happen to follow. Those who can not do
this single, simple thing are a disruption to discourse, not an aid.