Socrates: The disgrace begins when a man writes not well, but badly.
bj0rn: what do you mean badly?
Socrates: In good speaking should not the mind of the speaker
know the truth of the matter about which he is going to speak?
bj0rn: yes, of course. but what has that got to do with writing badly?
Socrates: Let me put the matter thus: When will there be more chance of deception --when the difference in truth is large or small?
Socrates: He, then, who would decive others, and not be decieved, must exacly know the real likeness and differances of things?
bj0rn: of course
Socrates: And if he is ignorant of the true nature of any subject, how can he detect the greater or less degree of likeness in other things to that of which by the hypothesis he is ignorant?
Socrates: Then he who would be a master of he art must understand the real nature of everything.
Socrates: He then, who being ignorant of the truth aims at appearances, will only attain an art of rhetoric which is ridiculous and is not an art at all.
please excuse if this slight modification offended anybody. if so, i must say that i had no intention of doing so.
i am perhaps doing something out of the ordinary. i am taking a subject from the pit the subject involves several threads) and posting it in the debates, because i want to cool things down a bit. the usual way is to go from the debates to the pit with an overheated subject. i do hope this will not present a problem for anybody, or should i say; i do not think this will present a problem. well anyhow, let us begin.
a few people have complained about not understanding my posts, evidence of that can be found in several threads in the pit, but those threads also include people who claimed to have understood my posts, so i am confused here.
since i am not a native speaker of the english language, i have often have problems when writing a post. for example i figure out what i want to say, but there is one word in the sentance i dont know exacly how to spell correctly. i do realize of course that i might be misspelling some words i do post, but that is something beyond my knowledge at that time, or a type error. anyway, if i do not know how to spell the word i try to figure out another way to spell out what i want to say. i find a different approach to the matter in hand. naturally success is variable, but i have always felt that what i was trying to say go through to the reader.
i am not worried about one or two people who dont understand what i was trying to say. i generally do not like to explain what i am saying as i go along, the words should speak for themselves, so i basically ignore it. well, saying that i ignore it is maybe a little harsh. i dont do quite that, i do take notice. but so far people havent corrected me. they have only yelled at me. a strange notion indeed, for i even explained that english isnt my native language. the reactions i got then were something like:
“then you shouldnt post in an english message board!”, and stuff like that. i will let that sentance speak for itself, for it is a matter of opinion.
the fact that most of those post have been in the pit, i am bound to think that people are just jabbing at me and have found this to be a good way to do it, in their opinion. now, as time went on i noticed that people were really misunderstanding what i was saying (although not all of them). not due to what i said was wrong in any way, but because they had a different perspective on the matter than i did. so most of the replies i got were right from the perspective of their speaker. recently i saw another tread where another straighdoper complained about the same thing (i feel no need to provide the link). so that got me thinking, how can i make a good post?
i reasoned that the speakers statements remain true and right until the time they are proven wrong by other statements. but in order to prove the original statement wrong you must know the truth of that statement. you can not post a reply to the original statement based on you own opinion of that statement. you must base your opinion on the truth of the original statement.
i belive i will make that my closing statement, the subject is now open for debate.
Socrates: There is nothing of which our great politicians are so fond as of writing speeches and bequeathing them to posterity. And they add their admirers’ names at the top of the writing, out of gratitude to them.
bj0rn: what do you mean?
Socrates: Why, do you not know that when a politician writes, he begins with the names of his approvers?
bj0rn: yes, what about it?
Socrates: If the speech is finally approved, then the author leaves the theater in high delight; but if the speech is rejected and he is done out of his speech-making, and not thought good enough to write, then he and his party are in mourning. So highly do they value the practice of writing.
warning!!! contents of this post can by misunderstood. i
myself intentionally inserted text that might cause confusion. if
you find anything else confusing, please dont hesitate to ask. - bj0rn