Etiquette in scientific debate

Good post.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I measure success by the degree to which I ruin other people's lives."

"Larry Weisenthal" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Even I am not presumptuous enough to tell people how to argue,

That's a very bold statement. And, I'm begrudgingly sniping the rest of your well thought incites to
point out that a decidedly balanced hypothesis can ridiculously be deflated by useless and baseless
indignant arguments. That's exactly the predicament that is frustrating rec.sport.swimming with the
recent addition of a certain enthusiastic but "depressed" contributor.

Re:Larry! said:

When did "an honest difference of opinion" turn into a dividing line for trench warefare of the
most personal nature? It's certainly happened in contemporary politics. It will be a disaster if
this sort of thing ever happens to science. Including swimming science.

Ah, Larry, you are so idealistic. Over breakfast this morning, I listened to a bashing not only of
the ideas presented by John Nash in yesterday's lecture, but of Nash himself. I have often overheard
discussions about quantum mechanics turn into personal attacks after the scientists ran out of holes
they could find in the theories. Literally, holes - black ones - have been part of the discussion
which has included the most renowned theorist. I'm not part of these conversations; I just overhear
them. I have my own area of hotheadedness. By the way, I read that New York Times article and I
thought it was very good. I will google you and see what you have to say in the political newsgroup.
I'm very partisan, so watch out.

Ruth Kazez

"Hugh G. Reckshun" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Good post.

A great post. However, lets not forget that the average person is not versed well enough in
biomechanics, hydrodynamics, applied training physiology,
psychology and performance strategy, motor skill acquisition, research methods and
interpretation/statistics or any other contributing discipline of swimming science. How can you
realistically involve and educate if you don't allow for that fact?

From: rtk [email hidden]

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I'm

very partisan, so watch out.<<

Before you started posting on r.s.s., I had a real knock-down, drag-out fight with you on r.s.t.
concerning my suggestion that what triathlon needed was a division which didn't allow wetsuits and
tricked-up, $3000 bikes. Other
r.s.t.ers were merely mocking in their contempt for the suggestion of a "retro" division. Your
finely-honed debating skills left me utterly eviscerated and defeated. But none of it was
personal, and, therefore, the whole exercise was eminently enjoyable.

- Larry

"Swanger" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Larry Weisenthal" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Even I am not presumptuous enough to tell people how to argue,

That's a very bold statement. And, I'm begrudgingly sniping the rest of your well thought incites
to point out that a decidedly balanced

hypothesis

Quoted message said:

can ridiculously be deflated by useless and baseless indignant arguments. That's exactly the
predicament that is frustrating rec.sport.swimming with the recent addition of a certain
enthusiastic but "depressed" contributor.

But yet you use the same approach. Do you oftensay one thing, and do something else, and regress
into personal attacks when you don't get your way? How come it bothers you when someone else uses
that tactic, but yet you have show to use it quite liberally? Strikes me as very hypocritical on
your part.

If you would prefer a modertaed group, that is more to your liking, perhaps you can take initiative
and start one, and be a moderator, then you can control your environment, and people in it. There
are many groups out there that are like that. Seems like it may be a better fit for you, if changes
in groups at large upset you to this level.

Or is it impossible for you to just say "I don't like it" without trying to villify something? Do
you feel like you're a bad person for having preferences, and something must be really bad in order
for you to dislike
it. Are you worried that disliking something that is not completely bad makes you a bad person?

You know, having extensive experience with people who have distortions, and considering that I'm
currently in training for certain psych subjects, I can probably recommend a place fot you to go to,
where you can correct your distortions. You know, just like you can correct ytour swi, stroke,
thinking distortions can be corrected with a little bit of time and effort. It will probably be good
for you. I mean, I cant imagine it being very healthy getting this angry over some silly Cat posting
on usenet.

Yea, you can say you;re not angry, but, unfortunatelt, I'm all too familiar with human nature for
you to hide that from me. Seriously, your attempt at condescending sarcasam reaks of it. A good
psychologyst can hel you understand the need to make such a post, and see that the way you feel
about the whole thing is for you to deal with, and not for me to change. I can even recommend some
good reading on personal boundaries. It's psych
200. Classes I was taking last year.

And yes, I am more concerned about voicing certain things than I am with how reading it is going to
make you feel. You're just going to have to find a way to deal with it. I understand and empathize
that the change is frustrating for you, but, it is what it is. I'm confident that you'll find a way
to cope with it. I'm hoping soon. I hate to see you all worked up over little things like this.

"Larry Weisenthal" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

When did "an honest difference of opinion" turn into a dividing line for

trench

Quoted message said:

warefare of the most personal nature? It's certainly happened in

contemporary

Quoted message said:

politics. It will be a disaster if this sort of thing ever happens to

science.

Quoted message said:

Including swimming science.

It's when the emotion and ego's get entangled with facts. Anatomy of arguments is quite interesting,
and often shows you what people are made of... You know, when their backs are against the wall.

As for the trench warfare.... It's a classic coping mechanisam most of us have, when we see
somethign that is threathening or disturbs us, or shakes up out deeply rooted deinals, maes us
uneasy, we often regress into an emotional response of making it look less threathening, which
includes joking about it, discrediting it, putting it down, using a number of approaches that would
make it appear less threathening to us.

You know, most people don't like top be challenged, it disturbs their safety zone. It sort of
bafflesme how people try do hard to make their safety zone static, instead of learning how to adapt
to the change. Things change, all the toime, at different rates. Those who can learn to trust their
ability to change end up thriving. Those who do not, little things, like an opinionated vocal usenet
poster create a significant disturbance.

Also there is another rather complex issue that many people have abour the issues of "good and bad"
and social belonging. Many people constantly struggle with whether they should or shouldn't do
something, out of fear that it may appear bad, and if they do something bad, they are worried they
will not be accepted in social circles where they feel is important for them to be accepted.
Belonging is a rather strong humanneed. And often necessary for survival. You may have noticed,
certain people here hve already indicated taht if they don't feel someone belongs to the group, they
would go as far as letting them perish. Well.. I could go on and on about this... It's very
interesting, and a part of why I'm getting more and more into psych.

For other people reading this... I know, this has nothing to do with swimming. If you have a problem
with it, I can offer you my sincere empathy. Unfortunately what I can't offer you is a promise that
Iwill change my ways, in spite of knowing that it impacts you. Or should I tell people: "Read at
your own risk". if your'e easily upset, by all means, don't read my posts.