Quote:
Josh Phillipson wrote:
in general,
winning arguments by attrition isn't really winning them at all.
..it could just mean people don't care enough to correct you, or to show you your error...or indeed, and even worse that the whole precept is flawed from the foundation upwards, and the answer is 'mu'. you have asked the wrong questions.
in general.
that said; sometimes a win is a win; like if you're a lawyer and a client pays you...or in a war. Victories in wars of attrition are indeed victories in the truest sense, but they aren't a means to finding the truth.
this is paraphrased from Gerard t'Hooft and what and how he feels and responds to the General Theories of Everything he invariably receives weekly
|
Winning? Who is fighting? I've been working through these issues steadily, here, elsewhere and in the dojo. Not a bit of fighting to it. "Ttheory of everything" , and here I thought I was just working toward the heretofore poorly described mechanics of Aiki. Ah, now I see my error. I was too narrow in my conception. I will henceforth incorporate quarks and black holes ...
No one is obligated to correct me, much less respond. Someone gratuitously undertakes what they assume to be a broadside deck-clearing dismissal, because they clearly have not thought the issues through. I state the case they too easily assume that I have not even thought about -- because I actually have, at some length.
I don't solicit agreement but I do not easily brook uninformed criticism - mainly because it is not useful. Rather, I attempt to inform the criticism so as to invite more, and more pointed (and more useful) criticism. I live in a professional world in which being wrong is not a sin, but part of a process of discovery of truth, when potential error is examined closely. I was under the impression that the discovery of error increases the level of knowledge all around. I think it would be immensely informative for me and everyone to be shown how wrong I am, and where exactly. Is it not part of this discussion forum to raise the level of knowledge on "aikido information"?
Should such a substantive response be inappropriate while the unreflective backhand is unremarkable ?