let me reiterate the first few exchanges (as close as i can remember) between him and i: "here, put your hand on my elbow. is my elbow moving?" "yes." "no, it's not." "yes it is, it moved about a centimeter in a few directions." "no, it's not moving. look, is my finger moving?" "yes." "no, it's not. it's moving spacially but it's not moving." "oh, so then your elbow was just moving spacially." "no, it wasn't." "but, i felt it move." "it wasn't moving."
as far as i can tell, he assumed i didn't understand what he meant by "spacially moving, but not moving", and thought i was still talking about his elbow moving in general, when i was actually talking about his elbow moving spacially. i know you assumed that i didn't understand him about that. so i imagine it's possible, maybe likely, that he assumed the same thing.
"The other big point you are probably missing is that Fred isn't mad at you." i have told you multiple times that i am very aware that he is in no way mad or upset at me. i also told you to stop assuming that i think he is. i should also note that i am in no way mad or upset at him. so stop assuming that i am. the only reason i have even a hint of anger or dehumanization against fred is because you keep assuming i do, and you keep bringing it up. this forces me to think about it from that perspective, which distorts my memory of it. it never would have even crossed my mind that fred could be mad at me for that if you hadn't brought it up. you actually make me mad at you for continuously bringing this up, because it proves that you're not listening to me.
so there you have it. the only argument you made that has ANY relation to my argument with fred is the part of #4 where i understood that i couldn't relate to what he was teaching thomas, and chose to stay out of it, because it wasn't for me. and even then, it's only really correlated, not causally related (at least, not to an extent that matters).
let me reiterate the first few exchanges (as close as i can remember) between him and i:
"here, put your hand on my elbow. is my elbow moving?"
"yes."
"no, it's not."
"yes it is, it moved about a centimeter in a few directions."
"no, it's not moving. look, is my finger moving?"
"yes."
"no, it's not. it's moving spacially but it's not moving."
"oh, so then your elbow was just moving spacially."
"no, it wasn't."
"but, i felt it move."
"it wasn't moving."
as far as i can tell, he assumed i didn't understand what he meant by "spacially moving, but not moving", and thought i was still talking about his elbow moving in general, when i was actually talking about his elbow moving spacially.
i know you assumed that i didn't understand him about that. so i imagine it's possible, maybe likely, that he assumed the same thing.
"The other big point you are probably missing is that Fred isn't mad at you."
i have told you multiple times that i am very aware that he is in no way mad or upset at me. i also told you to stop assuming that i think he is.
i should also note that i am in no way mad or upset at him. so stop assuming that i am.
the only reason i have even a hint of anger or dehumanization against fred is because you keep assuming i do, and you keep bringing it up. this forces me to think about it from that perspective, which distorts my memory of it. it never would have even crossed my mind that fred could be mad at me for that if you hadn't brought it up.
you actually make me mad at you for continuously bringing this up, because it proves that you're not listening to me.
so there you have it. the only argument you made that has ANY relation to my argument with fred is the part of #4 where i understood that i couldn't relate to what he was teaching thomas, and chose to stay out of it, because it wasn't for me.
and even then, it's only really correlated, not causally related (at least, not to an extent that matters).
Reply
Leave a comment