>I am asking that if a statement IS (factually) arrogant (not by some
>opinion or assessment but IS arrogant) what are the problems with
>pointing this FACT out and what are the balancing problems of NOT
>pointing it out?
And you present a fundamental problem. Good luck a shared accepted
definition of arrogant or any term. Its hard enough in face to face in
small groups, let alone via email among a thousand. In the literature,
researcher's can't agree on conceptual, let alone operational definition
of key constructs. Our desire for conflict and preservation of ego
confounds our ability to create shared knowledge of what a "fact" is.
How will I, personally, determine what is arrogant without assessment? To
know if something is arrogant or not, I make an assessment based on a
standard. Without shared knowledge, I fall back on my value system to
render my assessment.
Maybe WHAT IS ARROGANT is the secondary issue. The primary is WHAT IS
BEING ARROGANTLY SAID? Its a process vs. content issue. I care less
about how you deliver a message and more about what you are saying. I can
handle the arrogance. But underneath the arrogance, are you saying
something important? I don't know yet, because I've put up my shields
from your style. By my focusing on the process (delivery), I ignore the
content.
jeff rocchio talked about this list being too boringly "gentlemanly."
There is being supportive, and then their is being nice. I know of people
who are nice to me because they think they will hurt my feelings (my
feelings are under my control). In being nice/gentlemanly, they fail to
get the job done. Are we being supportive and getting the job done or are
we being nice and missing the boat? Both, me thinks.
With regard to Ray LaManna's comment on censorship, I'll admit I'm wary of
Rick's review of every message. I feel this review is not a value added
activity. The effort invested rarely produces equal or greater benefit.
If a message gets bounced back to me, I feel judged. But then, I get
judged every day, by with people with worse intent than Rick. I trust
Rick's intent in moderating, so I move on. Its not worth the energy for
me to change it.
--scypher@perform.vt.edu (Scott R. Cypher)
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>