Christos Stavrou wrote:
> Oh, no problem, thanks for mentioning :)
> It's well known that there is alot of alienating jargon in academic
> discourse. I could try to simplify, and anyway, sorry if it requires
> some effort from the reader, but that's not a reason for hostility,
> isn't it?.....
>
> By the way, if tomorrow I go to the doctor and he tells me that the
> latest research or theory goes against my ideas, habbits and
> long-standing convictions.. (and even smiles ironically because all
> these convictions were scientifically induced).. I may agree or
> disagree and contest or ask more about the arguments, but should I
> think that he's offending me?... Of course no :)
>
> Maybe most people are just not used to the exposition of our social
> history as contested rationalisations, contradictions, power relations
> and manufuctured 'truths'.. It's nothing personal of course.. I'm
> afraid, however, we all in this world need to start question our taken
> for granted beliefs, (especially if they're full of holes and even
> relate to our existance!).. The age of naive innocence is gone...
>
> Thanks Robert,
> C.S.
Points taken.
However, Robert's statement, "Furthermore, they tend to have a slightly
condescending tone that some may find offensive." is one that an introspective
person might think about, instead of dismissing it out of hand as not worthy
of consideration.
Just my MOST humble opinion, of course...
keith whaley
> 03/09/06, Robert Lewis <roberttlewis@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Christos,
>>
>> At the risk of triggering a lengthy response from you, I for one
>> do find some of your discourses overly convoluted and difficult to
>> follow. Furthermore, they tend to have a slightly condescending
>> tone that some may find offensive.
>>
>> Robert Lewis
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|