Squid Tempest wrote:
Paulus wrote:
PS - if people start shouting their mouths off on this matter, like silly children, I'd ask them politely to calm down and start again. Some folk are able to do that, others just can't control otherwise unresolved issues.
Slightly inflamatory statement there, don't you think?
Naaaahhh. If people start shouting their mouths off, they're akin to silly children - aren't they? Can we actually elicit structured, healthy open-minded discussions when one or more of the individuals concerned starts acting irrationally (i.e., allowing their emotions to override applied logical debate)? For the moment someone falls into the mire of allowing themselves to become emotionally compromised, the issue that's being debated is itself compromised. Irrationality emerges, as relative emotional surges move into psychological 'games' between opposing factions. I'd say that was childish misself. Or perhaps more accurately, it aint the way an adult discussion would move. In the former discursive arena, wisdom would be completely lacking; in the latter, it would be more manifest. Wouldn't you agree?
And we could of course, depending who you were talking to, say that the following remark is a "slightly inflamatory statement...don't you think?:
Squid Tempest wrote:
...I personally think metal detecting should be illegal.
If you say that to metal detectorists, would
that not be inflammatory?
You understand what I mean, yeah? It's all a matter of perspective, innit? I appreciate the value of regulating certain practices - much as should be done with more important issues (like banning people from driving to the shops to get some chips, when they can walk...global-warming, etc). But reactionary shouting only polarizes things more & more. And yep - it is childish. Soz if that upsets you (not my intention at all). But, hey - that's only my opinion. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. As someone who's never owned, nor used a metal-detector, I'm looking both ways with clarity and won't allow misself to be overcome by the lack of clarity which unresolved emotional responses elicits.
Squid Tempest wrote:
If you feel otherwise, fair enough, but I don't see why I shouldn't state my view without being pre-emptively called a silly child.
Please don't think I was referring to you. I wasn't at all. (indeed, I was totally unaware you'd written owt...soz...) If you feel aggrieved by my simple use of words, maybe it might be an idea to slow down a little, take a step back, and leave yourself open for wider parameters of debate? Just a thought... Let's not take this issue personally; as the issue itself is much more important than the foibles of our emotional reactivity, don't y' think? Clarity is the best way forward. And I think we as humans would move forward much more effectively with such simple principles developed, long though they make take to grow...
all the best - Paulus (probably talking bollox!)
