Misrepresenting what other posters say

Well, Peter had some words for them in his 2 epistle.

 

I did not vote in the poll, but have been making some noise about this very issue of late.

I did not find a response that is my own, but I will be happy to lay out my position for debate.

I see that we MAY recapitulate another person's post to gain a better understanding of what he or she posted. Sometimes the words used by a poster may come loaded with a particluar context or usage that the ones reading that word do not have. About the only way to discover that is to write something that details what was posted.

BUT...

When we do so, we SHOULD write the TRUTH of the other person's statement, even if the statement itself ends up being false. Deflecting an agrument with a fallacy is of no real use in debate, for we end up debating something that is not even being argued.

A couple of key phrases might be:

"Did you say..."
"I hear you saying..."
"Did you really mean to say..."
"Do you understand that if this then that..."
"The logic of your statement leads to this..."

And similar statements that offer a Socratic means to getting to the actual intent of the WRITER.

We suffer in this post-modern age with placing intent in the mind of the READER instead of with the WRITER, who actually HAD an intent when he or she wrote. For some, this is an ingrained way of thinking because of the educational system that taught such a way of understanding. A part of this post-modern issue is "deconstructionism" and we see that on the board often. Someone will post something and anoher will "take it apart" and work to blow the entire concept out of the water because they parse ONE WORD (or even a misspelled word). Thoughts often do not withstand deconstruction, which is why the tactic is used in the post-modern world -- it defeats TRUTH because indvidual words often can not be made to become the same level of truth as a complete statement.

So, while I FAVOR restating another's thoughts, I also favor restating them in as accurate a fashion as possible, then let the chips fall where they may.

Misrepresenting ANYONE'S position is the sin of lying. I said it, and I stand by it. But, that also requires the one writing to write what they actually hold -- and that is the second part of my argument. I am calling for people to PUBLISH their doctinal framework so that we can debate them HONESTLY on the merits of what they ACTUALLY BELIEVE. Anything less is patently false and we learn nothing, nor can the Spirit work through the Word to gain the truth of the matter.

 

IMO, there are many who take offense even at this.

 

Are you saying, "show me" as in you want to see a bunch of cites of posts where this happened, or are you saying "show me" as in you don't have a clue and you are probably just trying to start an argument?

 

my bet would be on option 2!

 

Stay out of the casino's.

 

Only been in one of the Detroit casinos twice, both times for Lunch, don't even know what the casino looks like inside even!

I NEVER have bought a lottery ticket, why start the casino action?

 

Good...I wouldn't put much stock into your betting skills...

 

He he he...now that is funny

John

 

What, betting the Lions to win a Superbowl NOT a sure fire bet?