Posted by finelinebob on September 3, 2006, at 0:11:04 [reposted on September 16, 2006, at 9:25:21 | original URL]
In reply to Lou's response- Actually, it is inaccurate anyway., posted by Lou Pilder on September 2, 2006, at 15:10:25
a false statement is not civil.
Let's see:
A false statement is not civil.
A true statement is civil.
... or could it be that:
A false statement is civil.
A true statement is not civil.Generalizations can lead to misinterpretations. Generalizations of definitives (All A are B) probably have a greater chance of leading to misunderstandings.
I could come up with simple examples to refute each of the four statements I made above. What potentially makes all of those statments uncivil in and of themselves are concerns of context and intent.
I tried my best to frame the context to examining a "logical proposition" by changing the subject line and removing all content from the post that included this proposition other than the proposition itself, even to the point of removing any indication this board uses to point out that the proposition was being quoted from another post. I also tried through this explanation to demonstrate my intent in how I chose to respond.
----------
But outside of all that is the fact that some people will still -- incidentally, serendipidously, subconciously, or intentionally (to name a few possiblities) -- misconstrue my intent or take it out of context.
Think globally, act locally. Civility starts at home.
----------
By the way, since many of you must have picked up the reference, if our context was some sort of Orwellian nightmare and we happened to be in the right building and I happened to be wearing the right "uniform", then you might realize the subject of this message is true, false, civil, and most decidedly uncivil all at the same time. That's context and intent for ya.
poster:finelinebob
thread:686504
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20060826/msgs/686504.html