[ExI] Raising the Level of Discourse in General

[Lee Corbin]

Passing over what "destroying lives" might mean, all
the way from *death* to causing people to simply
relocate in another country with no inconvenience---
two extremes that intelligent readers should not
read into what others mean--- on 4/17/2009 9:40 PM,
Rafal Smigrodzki (in Making Rationalizations...) wrote:

 > ### Let's not get hypocritical here....

 > ### Don't accuse me of being a liberal hypocrite...

 > ### Good, so you admit your math isn't worth a damn.
 > This invalidates all else - if you build a chain of
 > reasoning on quantitatively incorrect data, the
 > reasoning is invalid.

This apparent rigidity in thinking does not become
you. It's a "take no prisoners" style of discourse
into which it seems to me you lapse from time to time:

"This invalidates...", "Incorrect data",
"invalid" reasoning, math being "worth a damn" or not.
Sounds like I'm in a conversation with Mr. Data.
It's harder for thoughtful discussion to proceed.

Please relax and try to infer the *most* intelligent
possible meaning of what is said, rather than the least.

You accuse me of hypocrisy (above) when, I surmise,
it seems to you that there is an inconsistency in
my position. This is overloaded and unnecessarily
caustic language! Why is that necessary?

I never accused you of being a "liberal hypocrite".
Did I? So why the 2nd "###" above?

Besides, it's I who refrain from that kind of rigid
attack.

I don't think that you would speak this way in a
face to face discussion with me about any of these
topics, or with anyone here.

Lee