Why get "personal" when discussing a topic? (page 5)

tec

There have been some eloquent words on this thread speaking against insults and personal attacks.

It is true that disagreement is not attack... and some do perceive it as such. But disagreement that is littered with assignation of personal character; insults and ad hominem... these are personal attacks. They detract from discussion, and in fact often have nothing to do with the discussion at all.

If this topic was based upon a specific thread, then I am not answering as to any of those.

Just speaking as to the OP in THIS thread.

Peace,

tammy

Mall Cop

Good for you Terry. I agree that we should stay on topic and contribute to the topic on hand, anything else is to go off topic. Agree or disagree but please explain why so as to help us understand you. I find that there are usually three camps on any given topic. 1- those for. 2- those against, and 3- those on the fence for the time being. All three can and should stay on topic and give good contructive reason that is so. Then we all benefit from the discussion at hand.

Blueblades / Mall Cop

Terry

people don't enjoy the same expectation to privacy when in public vs when they're sitting inside their home, on private property.

Yes....and...No.

Anonymous posters with an alias are invisible as actual persons living in a real community. I have yet to see any of the worst offenders here divulge

their actual identity which would put them, at least nominally, on the same playing field with those of us who identify ourselves non-fictionally.

And, secondarily, this is a forum of people seeking refuge from bullying, taunts, oppression and mind games while members of the Watchtower Society.

How do you heal such wounds if your own brothers-in-banishment treat you with the same cold, heartless contempt?

It doesn't cost any poster here one shiny penny to be respectful when disagreeing with their wounded comrades.

There is really just no excuse, in my opinion.

I've watched for almost 7 years excellent minds come here and get into completely avoidable sniper attacks and then leave. And, let me tell you, when great thinkers leave---they leave ALL OF US behind.

We can learn from each other. It just takes patience, fellow feeling and the willingness to be wrong if the facts go against pet beliefs.

Farkel

Comments from two posters:

#1

:So, they fall back on childish mocking, provocation and personal attack.________Terry

:Does this post include your friend Farkel also ????? Or just folks who don't agree wit you

Twit.

#2

:maybe you should ask Farkel - he's the king of personal attacks in lieu of intelligent discussion.

Twit.

Both comments are from newbies here who know almost nothing about JW related debates and probably have never helped anyone from leaving the WTS. They want us to blow in their ears and pat them on the back. Sorry, if you make a crappy argument, it is still a crappy argument and I will not mollify you. You want to be mollified? See a therapist and pay $200 per hour to let him or her listen to your bullshit.

Nearly all of the time I attack the ARGUMENT and not the arguer. Only when the arguer attacks me or my motives personally do I deliver my venom. If you think I'm lying, then make a list of all my attacks in say, the last 5 years and sort them by 1) attacks on the argument and 2) personal attacks when they didn't draw first blood on me.

You newbies are a joke: whining little babies who want to be patted on the back and have everyone whisper in your ear how smart you are.

There. That's an ad hominem for you.

Farkel

What/who is defined as a "newbi?" New to the forum, newly escaped from the organization, or new to certain "arguments"/discussions? Just asking.

Farkel

: What/who is defined as a "newbi?"

Oh, someone who cannot spell it would be a good guess.

Farkel

BizzyBee

And your answer to Terry's question?

Why get "personal" when discussing a topic?

ballistic

tec

Mall Cop

Terry

Farkel

still thinking

Glander

panhandlegirl

Farkel

BizzyBee

Share this