31
31
0
I can say that I have seen a trend of somewhat disparaging remarks here. I have seen it on some posts here and due to this I don't comment due to knowing that a open discussion would be impossible. I know we all come from various backgrounds and with different knowledge but then we come with unknowns. To fill those gaps with an assumptions is faulty. Defending those assumptions is erroneous. I thought I would try to appeal to those here with what intellectual honesty actually is.
"it is an applied method of problem solving, characterized by an unbiased, honest attitude, which can be demonstrated in a number of different ways, including but not limited to:
-One's personal beliefs do not interfere with the pursuit of truth
-Relevant facts and information are not purposefully omitted even when such things may contradict one's hypothesis;
-Facts are presented in an unbiased manner, and not twisted to give misleading impressions or to support one view over another;
-References, or earlier work, are acknowledged where possible, and plagiarism is avoided."
If we can't have this than what is the point of a discussion? Some of the questions here are addressing sensitive topics. If you feel so heated that you must slam the other person for merely making a statement then maybe you need refrain from addressing it at that time.
If you want to see a good example of a great counter to a topic, see most posts by MAJ Carl Ballinger. I have never seen him act anything other than a professional and always build a solid argument. Even if I didn't agree.
"it is an applied method of problem solving, characterized by an unbiased, honest attitude, which can be demonstrated in a number of different ways, including but not limited to:
-One's personal beliefs do not interfere with the pursuit of truth
-Relevant facts and information are not purposefully omitted even when such things may contradict one's hypothesis;
-Facts are presented in an unbiased manner, and not twisted to give misleading impressions or to support one view over another;
-References, or earlier work, are acknowledged where possible, and plagiarism is avoided."
If we can't have this than what is the point of a discussion? Some of the questions here are addressing sensitive topics. If you feel so heated that you must slam the other person for merely making a statement then maybe you need refrain from addressing it at that time.
If you want to see a good example of a great counter to a topic, see most posts by MAJ Carl Ballinger. I have never seen him act anything other than a professional and always build a solid argument. Even if I didn't agree.
Edited >1 y ago
Posted 10 y ago
Responses: 29
10
10
0
Good post, CPT (Join to see).
I especially like this: "If you feel so heated that you must slam the other person for merely making a statement then maybe you need refrain from addressing it at that time."
I especially like this: "If you feel so heated that you must slam the other person for merely making a statement then maybe you need refrain from addressing it at that time."
(10)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
Just because you are in a Professional it doesn't make you a Professional by default. I think many feel that they are justified by achieving a certain rank and not for what they did when they were that rank. I have seen many horrible NCOs as I have seen officers. If you start with "Listen up you cherry LT" or "I have been in XX years" you are already discrediting anything you may want to say.
(2)
(0)
7
7
0
CPT (Join to see)
I regret to hear this. I will fight the good fight to ensure we can all voice our opinion without our character being questioned. I had someone call me a Newbie LT. The issue was that, upon looking at their profile, I have been the Army longer then they have been. They just have some false perception of a LT be some 22 kid off the block and stupid. If an NCO feels that way about officers I would question if he should even call himself an NCO by the example he is sitting. If he really cared he would mentor and degrade that officer.
(6)
(0)
PO1 Steven Kuhn
I believe that there is nothing wrong with conversations having major differences of opinions as long as we can all respect the fact that we can all have them and that engaging with people of different backgrounds and experiences broadens our horizons. It is only when the conversation becomes a personal attack that I feel saddened because I feel we fought for the right to freedom of speech and we should be able to enjoy it here on this site with our peers.
Respectfully,
Steve
Respectfully,
Steve
(1)
(0)
6
6
0
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google