Date: Mon, 01 Dec 1997 08:41:24 +0800
From: David Geelan <bravus-AT-innocent.com>
Subject: PKF: Response to Robert Basso


G'day Robert

I hope you'll forgive me for not having the time to rebut in detail your
very long post. I just wanted to make a couple of quick points, then
leave this discussion aside, with your permission, because it is related
more strongly to your self-definition and identity (and others'
definition of you, as you note) than to the work of Paul Feyerabend, and
is therefore probably of limited interest to the list members.

1. I was not "offended" by the fact that you chose not to spell out the
abbreviation for the New York Times. The point I wished to make was
simply about etiquette and consideration: in general it's best to err on
the side of being more explicit than less, precisely because you do not
know who will read the message. I do know that people from very many
countries post to this list, and many do not have English as their first
language, but even without that specific information, it's always best
to assume a world-wide readership for anything that goes to the
Internet. Do you know what the abbreviation 'SMH' stands for? Why assume
the world knows the NYT? The point is basically about consideration and
thoughtfulness for others.

2. It was my own fault for writing unclearly (for which I apologise)
that you assumed I extrapolated so much from this one instance. I used
the instance of the abbreviation as an example to lead in to a
discussion of what I felt to be your relatively narrow frame of
reference, but the evidence on which I had constructed that view of you
was the aggregate of all your posts to the list: the abbreviation was
just one example that I used rhetorically. As you point out, I ought not
to have assumed to know who you are on such flimsy evidence - but your
response does little to reassure me that your perspective is broader.

3. I myself would also identify myself as a Christian first, who
associates with a particular congregation of a particular brand for a
variety of reasons which are not absolute. Perhaps I have tended to try
to label you - and you have returned the favour! Maybe we can agree to
try not to label one another: but how is it possible to have any
meaningful discussion at all without using words as identifiers for
particular stances and perspectives ('places to stand and ways to
look')? Much of what you've assumed about my own perspective is
unrelated to my own self-description too: one of the drawbacks - and
glories - of the text-only world of e-mail lists!

I think, in consideration to the other list members, it would be good to
take any further discussion of these issues to private e-mail. 

Thanks for challenging my assumptions - hope I've been able to challenge
some of yours...

Regards,

David

-- 
David R. Geelan, Science & Maths Education Centre, Curtin University
GPO Box U1987, Perth, WA, 6107. Ph: +618 9266 3594 Fax: +618 9266 2503
Home Page: http://alpha7.curtin.edu.au/~pgeelandr/bravus.htm
Perfect love casts out fear. 1 John 4:18
**********************************************************************
Contributions: mailto:feyerabend-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
Commands: mailto:majordomo-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
Requests: mailto:feyerabend-approval-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu