permaculture

[kowens@teleport.com (Jeff Owens)]

Lee wrote:
>On the other hand if I attack someone's idea or the logic behind it, that
>doesn't mean I'm attacking that person as a person.  A lot of people seem
>to mistake one for the other as Dan pointed out, and I think that's sad.

How we word a statement has a lot to do with whether someone feels
personally attacked or whether the attack was directed at ideas.
I often put too much emphasis on some ideas and this makes them should
more emotional than objective.  The technique of labeling (name calling)
is an easy way to do this.  We can make up some unpleasant name with warts
and then put someone under this label.

Also, the balance between strong argumentive statements and passive
words which explore a viewpoint give a clue about the writer.  In
the end we take all these clues and balance everything to form a conclusion.
Often this reflects our present state of mind more than the writers,
and that can be a problem, but does not appear to be happening in this
thread.

So... Most of what i read on this list feels objective and not part
of an attack,  but i did feel an attack in the original statements
that triggered this discussion.  We can argue that this is life and
look beyond it to the ideas, or suggest that more attention be given
language use.  Both are useful.  It is all a question of balance.

 Both....

 ----------
Jeff Owens (kowens@teleport.com)  Zone 6-7
 Underground house, solar energy, reduced consumption, no TV