Withdrawn – April 27, 2021

Approaching 1600 words, what started out as today’s post just got dumped into the Ain’t never gonna see the light of day folder.

Subject was “conversation” and how in the current political/social environment, serious conversation often deteriorates into confrontation.  Why, and how, with examples from life.  My life, but life and experience, as participant and observer.

That post turned into a full-blown rant.  I thought it clever, often funny, and insightful.  Until I started editing.

A rant, neither fair to nor entertaining for people who regularly follow my ramblings.  Obviously justified as far as I was concerned, those I’d like to have read it and take what I had to say to heart, wouldn’t.  As much because I am not eloquent as for the fact that those folks were the reason for the rant in the first place.  Their belief in the one truth, their truth, is a monumental shortcoming, an insurmountable barrier to discourse.

Bias is acceptable. Well, not bias maybe, but opinion.  Intolerance is not acceptable. Intolerance, I believe is the reason so many conversations meant to share opinions become confrontations intended to deny opinions. At least a major reason.

When a party to a conversation cannot listen to and think about what the other party offers, the conversation has no value. Like my scrapped blog.

I believe what that scrapped blog said was a genuine attempt to get facts out there and prompt discussion.  But the coveted audience’s attitudes would not allow that. Rather made it pointless.

Best I stick to fiction.  I wonder if Will Rogers or Samuel Clemens ever ran into such difficulty.

Published by spwilcen

Retired career IT software engineer, or as we were called in the old days, programmer, it's time to empty my file cabinet of all the "creative" writing accumulated over the years - toss most of it, salvage and publish what is worthwhile.

10 thoughts on “Withdrawn – April 27, 2021

  1. I find it to be a fascinating treasure that conversation and confrontation have even come into the same ballpark. When I was growing up we were not allowed to talk about: politics, religion, money or feelings in public, ever, and public included our own family. (A private journal was also considered public, no matter where it was hidden.). If a hint of controversy or disagreement was even whispered, you got ‘The Look’ from Mothers Superior everywhere. The idea that folks even have ‘One Truth’ or are willing to share it with others is monumental. So, they suck at voicing it in a polite manner, no mystery to me, since I doubt they’ve had the opportunity to train.

    1. Hmm. Don’t know as anything is “off the table.” It’s when your dining companion insists you eat escargot knowing the idea not only repulses you, but risks your health and mental tranquility. So much hate is brought about by twits who condemn your hate but consider theirs intelligence.

  2. I fully concur with your point and completely agree that intolerance is not acceptable, opinions yes. Like the old cliche that says one can have one’s own opinions but not one’s own facts, I think too many people think they’ve the absolute truth and the rest of us are simply idiots not worth considering. These are valuable and important points that you’ve brought forth SP. Good post.

  3. Your post about your redundant post, actually makes the point very well. It is very hard to have a meaningful conversation sometimes about serious issues. When we had social occasions in France, people would discuss sex, politics, religion, equality, nothing was off limits. The conversations became quite heated sometimes, and with my limited French, I used to think that people were falling out. They weren’t, they were just having a good old fashioned exchange of ideas, and always parted on friendly terms.

    1. I like this idea. Informally, I’ve enjoyed such. But you get the drift here that obnoxious superior intellects ruin productive, entertaining exchanges. Fervid beliefs are fine. Assuming one has the right or responsibility to force his beliefs or values on others is evil. Thanks for contributing your thoughts.

  4. Really enjoyed this post. I agree with your insights and feel the need for change is deep. I am impressed with your writing. Thanks for the meal-needed some food for thought

    1. Thank you for stopping by and I’m quite glad you enjoyed the effort. I’d leave you with the question: how do we go about changing the way things are? Inasmuch as what we look to change are not political, religious, economic, gender, or ethnic beliefs, but our approach to and respect for each other’s values and opinions? Yeah, I been kicking this around ever since I first learned I wasn’t the sharpest tool in the shed, that my way of eating sardines wasn’t the only way it could be done. Really wanted to post the original but there was the prospect (opinionated as I am) that I’d cause more harm than good, offend more than inspire thought.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: