[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page

Reply to Tuna re Meany & Topics

Received the following...my replies included:

>I do not know why you dump on the topic
>selection system when it is the lack of imagination in the debate community
>which seems to trouble you. :) [slight jab in all directions]

My postings concern topic selection and interpretation...I agree that
interpretation can 'adjust' for some distortions in selection...

>>"In addition, the repressive strategy of cultural domination and
>>classification is present in the topic language suggested for all the
topics
>>that I have seen on CEDA-L. Apparently, there won't be any room for
>>non-hegemonic discourse in an activity that most participants describe as
>>"fun"."

>Your point here seems to contradict your earlier statement, at least in its
>implications. How can a topic be repressive if its only limit is
imagination?
>The language which you indict here is the language which above you say is
>no limit. 

The issue re contradiction is correct/incorrect. I am commenting on multiple
interpretations. I have different reactions to different interpretations...In
addition, while _we_ might agree re this issue, many others (the majority of
whom have communicated with me re context) view the topic language in a more
restrictive way. They are unwilling/unable/unsomething to provide an
imaginative interpretation of the resolution. They are imprisoned by the
language of the resolution, framer's intent, postings re the topic on the
net, a Nexis keyword search....

>I sense that your goal [although it is hard to determine any author's
>intention] is to help spark the community into a free exercise of
>imagination. That means you may need to bring us on board with some of >your
ideas in a way that makes the gang plank look like it is leading >somewhere
instead of off the side of the ship into a watery abyss. [Analogy >used for
illustration only]

I cannot write to meet the expectations of the readers (some demand more
information, others request that I be concise; some claim my references are
obscure, others claim they are obvious). These replies make obvious to me,
although admittedly, not to many others, the legitimacy of the claims that I
am making re interpretation and context...If I have any goal, it is the same
as yours---to encourage people to think for themselves...

As to the analogy, I do not want to dispense with it. I think it is
appropriate. I do, however, respectfully disagree with your suggestion in the
analogy...

I do not want to "bring us on board". I am arguing for an appreciation of the
watery abyss....My argument is that an appreciation of the familiar can
stagnate creative thought and lead to rote instruction and learning. I am
arguing, on this thread and others, for an appreciation of disorder,
confusion, and misunderstanding....I know that bringing everyone on board for
a margarita and poolside chat with Gopher on the lounge deck seems
comforting...I am, however, rejecting that comforting notion for a dive in
the ocean...(Here, I will make all my apologies: to you, for using your
analogy, despite its limited illustrative purpose; to Korcok, for another
reference to limited adventure; and to the many CEDA fans of the Love Boat).

>That last paragraph is, I think, my invitation to you to reach out in a more
>open and less confrontational way. I find your ideas to be stimulating and
>imaginative, and I believe I am able to read your posts constructively
>precisely because I know you somewhat after more than 20 years and see >your
wry grin as I read your words. Others may not be so lucky.
>Readers might be more encouraged if they understand that even when you >are
making strong statements, you invite their exploration. This is unlike >many
other posting styles.

I apologize to anyone upset by the language or content of my postings. It is
certainly not my intention to anger, frustrate, or embarrass anyone with my
comments...

I am very appreciative of any reply to my postings...In addition, I always
invite exploration of an issue. As noted in my postings, I do not believe in
universal truths---I do not believe that I have 'wisdom' re any issue. My
postings are my own explorations of issues...I respect individuals who engage
in critical thought...

At the same time, I do hold opinions and frequently make strong statements re
those opinions. It has often been necessary in debate. It is the extreme that
defines the center...(Tuna, these struggles seem relatively tame...This
struggle re topics, for example, is considerably easier than the struggles to
have the debate community accept growth arguments, or climate, or
overpopulation, or prolif, or a critique of the first amendment, or etc.)...

>Once again, I find your ideas and subjects very refreshing and an invitation
>to further discovery, not as a threat to the current intellectual order (at
>least not mine), and I urge others to look at them in that light.
>
>Alfred C. Snider AKA Tuna
>University of Vermont

Thanks. 

John

John Meany
The Claremont Colleges
Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page