Quote:
Originally Posted by Kjeldoran
I just said I'm not Zidane. What I do claim is that in a discussion about MY FEELING regarding verbal vs physical aggression, the opinion of Zidane is not relevant. Would I want to discuss the overal view on verbal vs physical aggression, then ofcourse his and your opinion is relevant.
|
See this is where me and Membrivio take different paths with you (and thus conclude that you're a lost cause). Myself and Membrivio seem intrested in discussing things - taking different perspectives into account, and trying to find something new in it. You, on the other hande, simply seem to be intrested in bringing out your personal view on things, ie. "how can this insult a Dutch person", or "your and his opinion are not relevant". Which further establishes the point of it being completely useless to discuss with you, since there's nothing to discuss: because you're not intrested in discussing overall views on subjects, you're simply intrested in expressing your opinion. It'd be a really, really poor medium of discussion if all threads were simply lists of people expressing their own opinions without any effort in contributing to discussing them beyond that.
Let me make an example. Around here, consultants aren't around to simply express their own opinions to their clients. They cooperate, they discuss, they're intrested in different views on different subjects, and they're very rarely not intrested in hearing your view on things just because they don't find it relevant. It could be that consulting culture is very different in where you come from.
Again, I don't care how brilliant a consultant you are. It simply doesn't show on your reading comperhension here, and yet, I'm not the only person to feel this way.
The general academic culture is very similar: opinions are encouraged, and opinions are discussed (this also seems to be the agenda outside my country: say Project Syndicate is a good example of ideas, and on the earlier example you could consider Greg Mankiw and Gene Grossman discussing what is vastly opinions; while taking into account other experts' opinions too on the offshoring subject).
This is why it's intresting to discuss with people who are open to discussion. People like you, however, are dead end, since you'll simply slam out any attempts to make perspective to discussions with statements on the level of "I'm not him, so his opinion is not relevant", or "He's not posting on this thread, so his opinion is not relevant" (neither of which were your ultimate reasons for it, even though you initially posted so, which puzzles me to no end!), or the bit Membrivio called it out on. It becomes too much of an effort to get any reasonable discussion going on.
To add to that, you genuinely seem to only read half the texts posted to you. Or at best skim through them. If you think "I'm not him, so his opinion is not relevant" or "He's not posting on this thread, so his opinion is not relevant" are good arguments then it's not pretty hard to call your argumentation that of a six year old. Of course, in question of whose football is more enjoyable to watch, Cruijff's opinion is valuable (because it "supports" your opinion), but in question of what kind of fouls are worse and what not, Zidane's isn't (because it doesn't "support" your opinion); while both of these discussions are by heart discussions of preference (and since reasonably well behaving preferences aren't much to argue about themselves, they can bring intresting insight to discussions).
If none of this actually goes through, and you resort to your petty skimming of a post and replying about only being here to state your personal feelings instead of having an intrest in discussing subjects further I'll just laugh a little.