September 27. 2008 16:17

Honestly, it’s a perfectly valid criticism. Personally, I don’t like to endorse other blogs. I don’t even like when people friend me on Facebook because I don’t like the idea of other people in any way paying for what I think.

That said, on your second point about criticism serving no purpose I have to (strongly) disagree. There’s a great deal of value in doing the right thing and in trying to get other people to do the right thing as well. Too often our modern, supposedly enlightened society endorses the idea of disinterest.

“Let him go his way and I’ll go mine”

But that isn’t a good thing. Society needs its members to be concerned with the morality of those around them if it is to function. To give just one example of what I mean I’d ask you to read through the Federalist papers (which were papers written to sell a political idea) and then read a few Political blogs. If you can do that and then make the argument that our society hasn’t taken a moral nose dive than I don’t know what to say.

We are a society that has largely forgotten that we need to try to be better. Our New Year’s resolutions boil down to things like “lose 10 pounds” rather than “be better people” and that’s sad. I won’t apologize for feel bad for doing my small part to change that.

Tom

September 27. 2008 23:12

I can see where you are coming from to an extent but I honestly don’t think you’re being fair. Except for on the "always the critic" part which your spot on about and is something I've been concerned with myself and been trying to take steps to improve. That said, I consider criticism of faulty logic as a positive thing in itself (more on that below)

Anyway, aside from that there are really two points you make and I’ll address both of them. To start to address the first one I’d like to quote the definition of self-righteous (which I justify doing in advance so it doesn’t seem snide)

----------------------------------
Convinced of one's own righteousness especially in contrast with the actions and beliefs of others : narrow-mindedly moralistic
---------------------------------
I’m sorry but that’s simply not me. I specifically go into painstaking detail about lessons I think are learned and the logic process by which I come about those lessons because I feel the need to justify what I’m saying.
People convinced of their own righteousness don’t do that. They don’t feel the need to justify themselves by writing page long entries because they’re already convinced they’re right.

You seem to be equating “concerned with morality” with “self-righteousness” and I think that’s a huge mistake on your part. That’s the point I was trying to make above which is that society isn’t concerned enough with the very important topic of morality and that’s something I don’t agree with.

Do you really believe that anyone who states a forceful opinion on morality is self-righteous? Or I guess more importantly, in your opinion how would you suggest I speak on morality without coming across self-righteous?

On the snide and angry part I’d like to cheat a little by borrowing from the FAQ section of my (admittedly over long) About Me page …

Why are you so mean? I don’t think I am mean but I know where the sentiment comes from.
Here’s the thing, I can be hard on people from time to time but that’s because I actually do care. It’s easy to just say “you’re great” to a person and then go on your way but to me that’s dishonest. That’s really saying “it doesn’t matter what you do it’s of so little importance that I’m just going to tell you how great you are no matter what”

I believe what people do is important and I believe that I have an obligation to tell them when their actions don’t deliver the results that their words are intending. So I'm not going to tell you how great you are unless you actually ARE great but I am willing to do everything in my power to help make you great. That's the sentiment I live by.
If that makes me look mean then so be it. I’d rather look mean and be comforted by the fact that I did the right thing than look nice and be the guy who just doesn’t give a damn.

For the record, I never mean things to come across as snide and I’m not really angry at the people I criticize. Scoble, for instance, is someone I’ve praised repeatedly in the past.

If you do get to read this comment (and get this far in it without giving up) I’d like one answer from you: Do you find you disagree with most of the stuff I say? The reason I ask is because I’m almost never angry when I write entries. There have been 4 posts I’ve written in anger and I remember each of them specifically. So I’m just curious if you could be projecting your own anger at what I say back on me (e.g. you are angry at me for what I’m saying so you therefore assume I’m angry in saying it)
I could be off base which is why I’m curious.

The rest is just strong opposition to ideas and that’s really what blogging’s supposed to be about. The open exchange of ideas. To take this entry for example, I don’t see any sign that I was angry when I was writing it (if fact, the tone through half of it is one of half jokingly poking fun at myself).

Anyway, thanks for the comment, it was really a treat to come home to tonight. Even if I don’t agree with you it’s always helpful to hear an honest appraisal of what others think and I really value being challenged in that way. If you have thoughts on this beyond what you said or reactions to what I said I’d love to hear them.

Tom

September 27. 2008 23:22

P.S. I was a Computer Programmer whose extra curricular interests were in Ethics, Psychology and Theology. I grew up in the projects and went to High School in an upper middle class suburb and my dad was an actor so most of my friends were Theatre geeks. So you can rest assured the cool kids in school wouldn't touch me with a 100 ft pole

Though on that note you have to give me credit for not going all psycho-anaylist on you and asking why you think being liked by the cool kids is something an adult should strive for in the first place.

Tom

September 28. 2008 06:02

On the FriendFeed thing, yeah, bonehead on me. Which is why I publicly admonished myself on it.

On the other, I’m not sure I stated what I was trying to say as well as I could have

Look, everyone knows you read subscribe to like, a Gazillion blogs. But when you make a list you are showing what you see value in and my point was that you don’t put value in diverse opinions. For instance, when I’m asked for good Political blogs I give blogs from both political spectrums because I value diversity and if someone is asking me for my opinion I care enough about them to give them diverse opinions.

You may very well read several diverse opinions but clearly you don’t force yourself to see the value in them and that was the point I was trying to make. That you have to force yourself to see things from other perspectives in order to find the value in them because otherwise you won’t.

Anyway, thanks for dropping by (and sorry for giving you a hard time, but I bash because I care)

Tom