On 2007-12-04 23:10:16 +0700, "Tom" <dantoPAYATTENTIONmel@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
said:
>
> "Richard Ellis" <RichardEllis1999@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:2007120422233116807-RichardEllis1999@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> On 2007-12-04 14:11:47 +0700, "Tom" <dantoPAYATTENTIONmel@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> said:
>>>
>>> There you go again, demonstrating just how much attention you pay to
my
>>> words. Now you'll be waiting for my response. You'll check several
>>> times a
>>> day to see what I'll say next, as you've already admitted you do.
>>
>> You show a good understanding of the way many people feel when
>> contributing to newsgroups where controversy is the norm. like this
one.
>>
>> The interesting question is; how did you gain such a good
understanding?
>> Most people would go about it by looking deep within themselves to see
how
>> they would (and have) felt in similar situations, and by then assuming
>> that the other person would feel the same.
>
> Actually most people would gain that insight from having participated in
> this group thoughtfully for more than a decade and remembering what
people
> say. It has nothing to do with "looking deep within themselves". In
fact,
> "looking deep within themselves and then assuming that the other person
> would feel the same" isn't going to teach you **** about how other
people
> feel.
Well, I didn't think you would actually agree, but it is what you did
none-the-less, you cannot gain insight into feelings by observing words
on a screen, but by examining your own inclinations.
>
>> So you have in fact given us all some interesting insights, not into
what
>> Joseph mght be feeling, but in fact into what you would be feeling, and
>> indeed, what you have felt.
>
> That's the kind of nonsense that arises from thinking that "looking deep
> withihn themselves" is a way to understand what others feel.
Well, like I said, I did't expect you would agree.
>
>> Hi by the way.
>
> Hi, Rich.
Long time between drinks.
--
Rich
|
