Re: Tolerance

[Keith Moore <[e-mail]>]

On 7/17/19 9:48 AM, Ted Lemon wrote:
> On Jul 17, 2019, at 5:55 AM, Keith Moore <[e-mail] 
> <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>> I think I understand the problem and agree that long conversations 
>> are tiring and discourage participation.   But how does one know when 
>> posting that the thread will never go anywhere?   Is it wrong for 
>> people to continue to seek resolution just because others don't care 
>> or have given up?
>
> It’s wrong to seek resolution at all unless it is useful.  I mentioned 
> this particular thread because you’ve been going back and forth with 
> various people for 42 messages just under just this subject line, 
> which is one of several that sprung from the original thread.  You are 
> never going to get resolution on this, because there isn’t consensus 
> on it: some people believe one thing, and some people believe another. 
> Continuing to discuss it is not adding value, and hasn’t been for 
> quite some time.

Perhaps I'm naive, but I do think that most people can learn to 
accommodate multiple points-of-view into their own thinking.  I've seen 
it happen on many occasions.  (I wish it were more frequently taught in 
schools.)

However I was just thinking this morning (before receiving your message) 
that there probably wasn't much, if anything, that I haven't said 
already on the topic.

I don't automatically accept others' evaluation about what is "useful" 
or "adding value".   I know there is potential value there, even if it's 
a gamble as to whether it will be realized. Other people may yet be 
surprised.  And if people did accept others' (premature) evaluations, 
anyone could easily (deliberately or not) conduct a DoS attack merely by 
being stubborn for a short time.

But I'll check out the books you recommended.

Keith