Home

Strips

Comments

Sort By:
Nov 15, 2010
@ airmikee - at least read the post I made to tfulmer. If you're going to argue against something I haven't said then I can't really reply to it.

I'm going to go with the sentiments of my favourite philosopher F Schiller here (a great pragmatist) when I say that if you insist on just reading the most idiotic and overblown meanings into anything I say and then attack it - then really I must accept that as a strange way of accepting defeat. If, in order to have an argument, you have to resort to disagreeing with things I haven't said, and indeed saying things that I actually agree with, then I don't need to make any further statements to be fully correct and unchallenged.
 
 
+11 Rank Up Rank Down
Nov 14, 2010
Uh.. no thanks, Kevin. We don't need a world where people that can not logically think a problem through are treated as the same as people who can think things through logically.

As a species humans have already gone through a centuries long fit of accepting "feelings" as fact, it was called the Dark Ages, and it set our collective intellectual development back by a few hundred years.

If I'm a bigot for not accepting someone's illogical, irrational, feelings, then I'll wear that bigot title with a smile.
 
 
Nov 10, 2010
@ tfulmer1

No I don't mean that. In fact other long posts I've written on here before have defended rational decision-making over just going with what you'd like to be the answer to the hilt. What I'm saying is that it's discriminatory to make fun of people just because of that, in the same way as it would be offensive to laugh at a Dyslexic trying to read a Haynes Manual, or baiting an Autistic child into embarrassing situations and laughing at their inability to understand. Of course you need someone who can make quick decisions based on actual facts to, say, clean up the Deepwater Horizon spill, but you need a completely different type of mind to try to salvage the reputation of the company with the public, and another completely different mindset to rebuild the morale after a round of layoffs. Laughing at rather illogical people trying to make high-tension decisions is no better than laughing at a competent engineer for being socially awkward (note - not saying engineers are socially awkward as a rule, just using a hypothetical one who is as an example)

You need varying approaches to make teams work (see Belbin and Myers-Briggs) and it's arrogant to, just because you approach something one way, to make fun of someone for failing in a situation in which they are not competent.
 
 
Nov 10, 2010
@ tfulmer1

No I don't mean that. In fact other long posts I've written on here before have defended rational decision-making over just going with what you'd like to be the answer to the hilt. What I'm saying is that it's discriminatory to make fun of people just because of that, in the same way as it would be offensive to laugh at a Dyslexic trying to read a Haynes Manual, or baiting an Autistic child into embarrassing situations and laughing at their inability to understand. Of course you need someone who can make quick decisions based on actual facts to, say, clean up the Deepwater Horizon spill, but you need a completely different type of mind to try to salvage the reputation of the company with the public, and another completely different mindset to rebuild the morale after a round of layoffs. Laughing at rather illogical people trying to make high-tension decisions is no better than laughing at a competent engineer for being socially awkward (note - not saying engineers are socially awkward as a rule, just using a hypothetical one who is as an example)

You need varying approaches to make teams work (see Belbin and Myers-Briggs) and it's arrogant to, just because you approach something one way, to make fun of someone for failing in a situation in which they are not competent.
 
 
Nov 10, 2010
@ tfulmer1

No I don't mean that. In fact other long posts I've written on here before have defended rational decision-making over just going with what you'd like to be the answer to the hilt. What I'm saying is that it's discriminatory to make fun of people just because of that, in the same way as it would be offensive to laugh at a Dyslexic trying to read a Haynes Manual, or baiting an Autistic child into embarrassing situations and laughing at their inability to understand. Of course you need someone who can make quick decisions based on actual facts to, say, clean up the Deepwater Horizon spill, but you need a completely different type of mind to try to salvage the reputation of the company with the public, and another completely different mindset to rebuild the morale after a round of layoffs. Laughing at rather illogical people trying to make high-tension decisions is no better than laughing at a competent engineer for being socially awkward (note - not saying engineers are socially awkward as a rule, just using a hypothetical one who is as an example)

You need varying approaches to make teams work (see Belbin and Myers-Briggs) and it's arrogant to, just because you approach something one way, to make fun of someone for failing in a situation in which they are not competent.
 
 
 
Get the new Dilbert app!