by AMNESIAN 126 Replies latest jw friends
So Teejay,
You really think you made a difference in your mother's life, because you hit her up side the head with a verbal 2 by 4. You don't really believe that now do you??? Now, if you do believe your delusion, then she is culpable from now on, for any more of her JW activity, because now she KNOWS!
Larc,
Did I help her? I'd like to think I did. That's a good question.
She wanted to know why her baby boy was an atheistic, baby-sacrificing pagan likely on the road to perdition. Just kidding.
She was under the impression, it's hard to say exactly what, that I was not the same person she raised. I have a small goatee, I don't go to the meetings or out in service, don't read the mags. As far as she can tell, I'm just not the same. I asked if she would mind if I showed her that yes, I beleive differently but on the inside I am essentially the same.
I used one example—whether or not everything in the Watchtower magazine is true. I told her that she taught me that it was. She denied ever teaching me that and I immediately admitted that she probably didn't point blank say those words. But, since she DID teach me that these were Jehovah's people and had His backing, and since she never told me to question ANYTHING in the magazines and books, she may as well have taught me.
From there I explained that I once honestly and deeply believed that if a science book said one thing and the Watchtower said something different, I believed the magazine and that the authors of the science book were wrong because Satan was backing them and opposing God's people. I went on w/ other examples. A look of sadness came over her face, as though she was genuinely sorry that I believed that way all that time and she had never said anything to correct my wrong thought. Anyway, this line of discussion went on for about twenty minutes so I won't bore you with all of it. The point is, in the end, she understood that right now, in many ways, my mind is where it should have been all along.
Do *you* think I helped her, Larc?
tj
teejay,
Do I think that you helped her? I honestly don't know. I am sure you helped her understand your point of view. It is unlikely, but remotely possible that it might help her change her point of view as well.
One of the points I have been trying to make in my Social Influence thread and in various posts it that the typical JW at all levels suffers from a close minded frozen set of beliefs. I don't see the vast majority of them as evil at all, but as misled. I pity them. I don't blame them or castigate them. My own sister was valdictorian of her class, but today at the age of 58 she is still the close minded JW that she was from birth. Is she evil? No. Would she disfellowshipp me if I confronted her with my beliefs and/or the WT suddenly got real strict. Yes, in a heart beat. She would be wrong for doing so, but not evil, in my opinion. If she was a male elder, would I change my assessment of her. Not in the least.
Larc,
In my opinion, you and I were thinking different things by the question, "did teejay help his mother?"
A few years ago I came to view JWs in the same way you view your sister. I think they are very misled, as I was, but most are not evil in the least. That's why I often find myself out-gunned here on this forum when loyal Witnesses show up. I think they have the right to be a JW if that's what makes them happy.
What I meant when I said I thought I helped her wasn't to say that I influenced her view of the JW religion in any way, and that's never my intention in talking to any JW, including my mother. Years ago I lost interest in those kinds of debates and gave up trying to persuade JWs that they were wrong.
No, the way I helped her was to give her some insight into how her son thinks, where her son's mind is right now. I think I set her mind a little more at ease. In that respect I think I helped her quite a bit.
tj
I was sitting here thinking of the genesis of Amazing's last thread.
In the beginning post, he admits to having less than full information but that didn't stop him from presenting an argument and drawing a conclusion.
It's possible to start with a wrong or false premise and end w/ an accurate conclusion, but not in this case. Generally that is a faulty way of arguing a point since he may (or may not) have accurate information. In this case, his information WAS flawed and so was his conclusion.
The same thing happened last night in a rather odd exchange I had with hmmm. His last post presented an argument or point-of-view about me "changing my mind" when I never said anything of the kind. My post previous to his was an answer to a totally unrelated question. Our "conversation," an extension of a long-running dialog, went something like this:
Amazing (last week): "I like burgers, and here's why...."
AMNESIAN (last week): "Oh no, Amazing, burgers are no good. I like pizza, and here's why...."
teejay (last week): "hmmm... you have a point, Amazing. But I like pizza, better."
Hmmm (speaking rhetorically last night and well into the debate): Man! I don't see why people get so bent out of shape. Pizza is good. Burgers are good. What difference does it make, teejay? (speaking rhetorically, unbeknownst to me)
teejay: oh, I suppose in the end, you have a point, Hmmm. It really doesn't matter.
Hmmm: gee, teejay! When did you change your mind about pizza? Sheesh! I wasn't even trying to change your mind, fella. I guess we all agree.
teejay: Whuh?????
----------------------------------------------
hmmm, seems like at least *some* of the disputes can be avoided here if we stop to ask--try to figure out--what the person is really saying before we start off on our rant.
That's my story, and I'm talking to no one in particular and everyone in general.
teejay,
Based on your elaboration, I would say that, yes, you helped your mother. My own mother was very upset when I left, but over the years, she came to see that I really hadn't changed much as a person, and she seemed to accept my decision a little better, although we really didn't discuss much as you and your mother have. My sister didn't talk to me much for about 15 years. Then, when became necessary for us to copperate to help our very ill mother, my sister came to understand that my wife and I still loved my mother and would do anything we could to help her. In short, we had not become bad people. Since that time, my sister and I talk long distance at least once a month and we occasionally meet for a personal visit. Regarding beliefs, we have a don't ask, don't tell arrangement.
…last night in a rather odd exchange I had with hmmm. His last post presented an argument or point-of-view about me "changing my mind" when I never said anything of the kind. My post previous to his was an answer to a totally unrelated question. Our "conversation," an extension of a long-running dialog, went something like this:
Amazing (last week): "I like burgers, and here's why...."AMNESIAN (last week): "Oh no, Amazing, burgers are no good. I like pizza, and here's why...."
teejay (last week): "hmmm... you have a point, Amazing. But I like pizza, better."
Hmmm (speaking rhetorically last night and well into the debate): Man! I don't see why people get so bent out of shape. Pizza is good. Burgers are good. What difference does it make, teejay? (speaking rhetorically, unbeknownst to me)
teejay: oh, I suppose in the end, you have a point, Hmmm. It really doesn't matter.
Not that it’s important, but which is it… “His last post presented an argument or point-of-view about me "changing my mind" when I never said anything of the kind.” Or “oh, I suppose in the end, you have a point, Hmmm. It really doesn't matter.”?
Hmmm: gee, teejay! When did you change your mind about pizza? Sheesh! I wasn't even trying to change your mind, fella. I guess we all agree.teejay: Whuh?????
This reminds me of the sit-com episodes where six people tell the same story six different ways. Orson Scott Card does an excellent job of showing how viewpoint and unknown background can completely change a story. Ender’s Game tells the story of a brainiac kid. Ender’s Shadow tells the same story from another character’s viewpoint, which makes it an entirely different story, built from the same set of facts. Both books are excellent.
Here’s my take how the "conversation" progressed:
Amazing: “I used to work in the burger industry, and I don’t think they’re 100% bad…”
Amnesian: “Oh no, Amazing, burgers have not one redeeming quality. This is proven by the fact that pizza has long been oppressed by the burger industry.“
Teejay: “Amnesian is completely right. Also, I think this issue is of paramount importance.”
Hmmm: (NOT speaking rhetorically) “Man! I don’t see why people take such an extreme stance. Isn’t there a middle ground? Since we all agree that burgers are not 100% good, and pizza has been undervalued, what can and/or should we do about it today? Incidentally, Teejay, you said the vileness of burgers was an important issue. Did you mean it was important to current, or ex-members of the burger industry? I’m interested in your viewpoint.”
Teejay: “Hmmm, you wrote a really long post to say it’s not important. I agree.”
Hmmm: “OK, we agree. But you don’t seem willing to discuss it, so I’m going to rhetorically ask, ‘what made you change your mind.’”(HERE was the rhetorical question)
Teejay, I think there have been a number of misunderstandings in the discourse between you and I:
1) I thought you were saying that “elder culpability”—Amnesian’s original issue--was important. I think the issue quickly changed to one of “gender/chauvinism”, and I now see that this might be the issue that you were calling important. If so, then I agree with you.
If you were, in fact, saying that the "culpability" issue was very important, I was simply asking your opinion as to why you felt that way. I’m not married to my opinion, so I was looking for an exchange of viewpoints, not an argument.
2) I thought you were blowing me off by saying that my post was not important. After rereading it, I now think you were actually summarizing my post.
First a little background. On this thread, Outnfree agreed with Amnesian and summarized her tome into one succinct paragraph. Most readers probably had a chuckle about it, and you responded good-naturedly that she’d done a good job of summing it up. (Or something like that. I’m not going to spend time finding the quotes to make sure I use the exact right words to score points or avoid painting myself into a corner. If I misremember your words or intent, just tell me, but please don’t think I’m trying to mislead or twist things.)
Anyway… you had something nice to say about Outnfree. Then, on the screen-name/character thread, she continued the joke. You had posted something rather long. She summed it up with a sentence or two, a clear parallel to the earlier thread where she had summed up Amnesian’s post. I thought you’d chime in joking that she should be the Official Post Summarizer for the board or something, and you did. But you prefaced it with:
“Regrettably, I have not taken special note of you before, but if this note of yours is any indication of your insight or character, I will be mindful of your comments in the future on this board. Perhaps I should have enlisted YOU to answer the charge that Brother Amazing laid at my feet for waiting's words, as obvious as the case was that he seemed to overlook. (Again?) “
That first sentence really bothered me. I don’t know Outnfree well, we’ve only chatted once or twice. But I know that she seems to be a very nice person. She entered the fray in a volatile thread and agreed with Amnesian, while trying not to strip Amazing of all dignity (I think she is the one who said she’s met him, and he was not the same in person as he sometimes comes across on the boards).
Anyway… your words to her seemed so dismissive that I was taken aback. Here you had joked with her amiably earlier that day, and suddenly you’ve lost all recollection of that (and her). That’s fine, people forget, but the tone seemed like she was an insect who’d been beneath your notice, but now showed some promise, so you were going to bless her by being mindful of her comments in the future.
I sat there saying to myself, “Self, what would have happened if Amazing had said those words. Imagine if Amazing had pronounced from on high that he had not taken special note of a poster before (especially a poster that he’d just bantered with). Imagine that he said he’d have to be mindful of their future comments, and he might consider the ultimate boon of enlisting them to be used as a tool to further his bounteous works in the future. Wow. That sounds more arrogant than the GB!”
I have no idea how Outnfree interpreted this, and since nobody else commented on it, maybe I’m the only person who took it this way.
Nonetheless, right or wrong, I read your reply to me right after reading this, so maybe I was spoiling for a fight.
Hmmm,
What difference does it make?
In a new paragraph, which usually means a new thought, you said, “After more than 2,500 words (I had Microsoft do the counting), that's the point I got from your post…”
Making an issue of how many words it took for my “nothing” post added to the feeling that you were just going to be taking shots at me.
Then, lo and behold, I re-read your words a couple of days later.
Maybe I was reading too quickly the first time, and maybe your choice of paragraph breaks contributed, but whatever the reason, I’m pretty sure now that I misunderstood you. Instead of evaluating my post, you were summarizing it. You said “that’s the point I got…” “That,” used in this way usually indicates something in the past, something already stated, so I should have realized that “that” referred to the sentence immediately preceding it, namely, “What difference does it make?” I apologize for the misunderstanding, and the provocative post it elicited from me.
3) Last, and probably least, you misunderstood which of my statements were rhetorical.
Hmmm (speaking rhetorically last night and well into the debate): Man! I don't see why people get so bent out of shape. Pizza is good. Burgers are good. What difference does it make, teejay? (speaking rhetorically, unbeknownst to me)You apply my rhetoricalisialitizationismness (new word) to the post previous to the one in which the word “rhetorical” appears. I made no mention in my “megapost” that anything in it was rhetorical.
This is when I used the word “rhetorical”:
It looks like we agree—now.I said “this is officially a rhetorical question…” Up until this point in the post I had not stated any questions, but one immediately followed this phrase. The use of the phrase “this is” indicates that the next question is going to be rhetorical. Had I said “that was a rhetorical question…” I could understand how you might think I was referring to a previous posting.
But this begs the question (this is officially a rhetorical question. I don’t need to know how many letters or pixels are in this post) “why did you change your mind?” I haven’t followed things closely, but I wouldn’t be surprised if this isn’t the first time in your posting history that you’ve changed your mind on a subject. You didn’t come close to saying you were wrong (and it was never my contention that you were) but you completely reversed your position on an issue. That’s more fascinating to me than the rest of the discussion.
Then again, I can’t criticize you for a reading comprehension error when I made a more obvious one, now can I?
These three misunderstandings (for which I accept 72.349% of the blame) speeded the decline of what I thought could be an innocent dialogue into a brouhaha-in-the-making.
My board time is limited, so I think my participation in this thread is probably over. Again, I apologize for my misunderstanding.
Hmmm
[Edited to make it somewhat more readable...]
[...and to remove a comment that was more inflammatory than I intended...]
[...and because I evidently haven't learned the difference between "tantamount" and "paramount"]
