From: utzoo!decvax!harpo!npoiv!npois!ucbvax!poli-sci Newsgroups: fa.poli-sci Title: Poli-Sci Digest V2 #151 Article-I.D.: ucbvax.7925 Posted: Tue Jul 6 17:17:02 1982 Received: Wed Jul 7 01:58:52 1982 >From JoSH@RUTGERS Tue Jul 6 17:17:01 1982 Poli-Sci Digest Wed 7 Jul 82 Volume 2 Number 151 Contents: Part of the Solution (2 msgs) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 2 July 1982 22:52-EDT From: Leonard N. FonerSubject: Bravo! Kudos to you, Gary, for helping to remind all of us to consider carefully the \meaning/ of what we say on this list. I for one had gotten so used to the level of flaming on the list that I didn't notice it any more; I simply discounted nearly \everything/ I read unless it was obviously calmly and carefully constructed. Unfortunately, I fear that too many messages of late have not had the benefit of a cooling down period before they were sent. Your message also illustrates one of the benefits of this kind of discussion, as opposed to one in person. While an in-person argument may involve lots of banging on the table and so forth, it also has built-in limiters---people do not so easily call each other names and generally flame because they feel more that they really are talking to another person. The benefit of electronic discussion that your message reveals is the ability to calmly take apart what was said and analyze it for what is really being said, with adequate documentation---there can be no doubt at all as to what was actually \said/, only to the \meaning/... and that can be carefully dissected. In any event, thank you for a message that seems to be appropriate for dealing with the kind of strong feelings that have been stirred up. And, as a final comment, I am at this moment wearing a T-shirt with a little man sitting in the bottom of a beaker filled with some liquid, with the legend, "If you're not part of the solution, then you're part of the precipitate." I think that sums up my position on the whole "if not for me then against me" situation pretty well. Have fun all. Let's not have to keep getting the fire extinguishers every time people discuss something. ------------------------------ Date: 6-Jul-82 12:06:03 PDT (Tuesday) From: Reed.ES at PARC-MAXC The fact that I have remained silent for weeks of Poli-Sci discussions on various issues does not in any way describe my agreement or disagreement with the opinions therein expressed. Lamson's argument only applies in a case where someone is specifically required to provide a disagreement and refuses. This is not always the case, and in particular, is not the case in the example he cites. Salamin leaves out a fifth case: (5) the silent person is asleep. In response to Breslau's comment on voting rights: 'The right not to vote should be as well-respected as the right to vote'. I believe that every item on the ballot should have a no preference option. Then the right not to vote is explicitly defined for every issue, and there is no longer any need to stay out of the electoral process in order to express dissatisfaction with the candidates or issues. -- Larry -- ------------------------------ End of POLI-SCI Digest - 30 - -------