Dave Hanson:

The goal of academic argumentation is the truth.  That could be somewhere between two sides of a debate.  As an intellectual exercise devoid of personal emotions or agendas, ideally, the truth is the common objective, not winning the debate just for the sake of proving oneself right.  Of course, even in academic argumentation personal opinions, emotions and egos get involved, but they tend to get in the way and it's best to set them aside to the extent that it's possible...So why can't two or more people in an academic argument separate opinions and emotions from facts?  Well, they can.

 

Dave,

I don't disagree with what you have said in this post... for the most part. To clarify, I think some topics/issues can cause people to have strong feelings that contribute to having an interest and a desire to discuss or debate the topic. One can still employ critical thinking skills and debate or have an academic argument on said topic while maintaining clear thoughts and discussing facts. I don't think it is either or and suspect you agree with that. It would be different if we are talking about a young child that becomes overly emotional versus most adults. I say this to clarify my thoughts on the matter and not to further cause stress! 

Deb

Clonnie Yearout:

Ah, but attorneys employ emotion as just another tactic to win, Deb, not to arrive at the truth.  Given a choice of arriving at the truth or winning their case, most attorneys would opt for the win.  Our little panel here isn't like that -- at least I hope it isn't.  Our objective is to arrive at the truth of whatever we're discussing, or as close as we can get to it.  ...If we are in agreement about an issue then we can relax and emote to our hearts' content, but if there is disagreement, then it's, "Just the facts, Ma'am." 

Then again, I'm a man, and a conservative one at that.  What do I know about real emotion? 

 

Clonnie, 

I can't disagree with your post. You make a great point about attorneys and use of emotion as a tactic. (I knew that would be said after I wrote it!) I think emotion in relation to topics is a gauge of our interest level in the topic and not  something that would necessarily be visible to others when we discuss it. For example, I have less interest in discussing financial/economic issues than other topics like education. That doesn't mean I will become emotional when I discuss education. Does that make sense? It is late after all so it may not!!  

I agree 100% that VoV is a way to arrive at the truth. I would add that beyond finding truth in issues, we simply enjoy discussing a variety of topics with each other--a process. I don't expect that we will all agree on very much and that is just fine--and more fun. We wouldn't have anything to talk about if we always agreed.

Deb

Joe Campbell:

As for "I'm Sooner born, and Sooner bread..." it's actually part of the OU fight song. <do they still call them fight songs nowadays>

 

I forgot to mention, I did read the link to 16NOV75. Really great stuff.  Thanks for sharing it with us.

Norb

Deb Landgraf:

Dave, I don't disagree with what you have said in this post... for the most part. To clarify, I think some topics/issues can cause people to have strong feelings that contribute to having an interest and a desire to discuss or debate the topic. One can still employ critical thinking skills and debate or have an academic argument on said topic while maintaining clear thoughts and discussing facts. I don't think it is either or and suspect you agree with that. It would be different if we are talking about a young child that becomes overly emotional versus most adults. I say this to clarify my thoughts on the matter and not to further cause stress!

I agree it is not only possible but common to have spirited debates that are rational.  An academic argument can be lively and assertive.  It's more a matter of content and purpose than style.  The content of an academic argument should be facts and logical reasoning, not opinion and emotion.  The purpose should be establishing the truth, not wearing down the opponent.  Whether you "win" an academic agument should be because of the merits of your position and should have nothing to do with your passion or aggressiveness and rhetorical skills.

P.S.  You're not contributing to my stress.  This is a relaxing diversion.  It's also my body clock at work.  I get wound up during the days that I teach and relax in the evening.  I teach on Mondays and Wednesdays.  I am calm now, having walked Ricky and Lib, eaten, and gotten some work done.  Adding to my stress is the fact that I am chairing an accreditation committee for a college in Florida next week, so I have my usual work for this week, plus making arrangements for my classes to get along without me next week, and preparing for my site visit.

 Dearest Sandi,

How sweet and kind of you to offer to help.......Are you really still with AOL 4.0 ?  Think my AOL is 9.0.....Anyway, I'm quite the computer dummy and can find no such thing as "Preferences"   under the Tool bar, wherever that is supposed to be, lmao !  Frankly, I'm bewildered as to why everyone can't post in larger print to begin with?  Is that really so complicated to ask?   I'm sure there has got to be hundreds of people who do not bother to read this weekly panel due to the small print.  I personally regret not being able to keep up and follow along with all you great panelist and your inspiring and at times, humorous dialogue.....(note also that spell check does not work when typing directly on this site) I'm humbled to be among such a great group of intelligent, well written as all of you are ! 

As a foot note to the general discussion, I got my Medicare Advantage re-newal package for 2010.  All my co-pay for all doctor's has gone up 10 and 15 dollars per visit. All other mimimum allowed payments have gone up in every catagory.  It's now gotten so bad that I'll even have to think twice before even going to a doctor.  They'll pay $100.00 for ambulance transport to RMH.  I can see the the hospital from my rear deck.  It is less than a mile away and the ambulance fee is over $350.00.  And as you all may have seen on the news this evening, all the companies that received billions in bail out money and once again wanting to dish out huge bonus........And someone said to me early, "I need to cut Obama some slack"  He can have all the slack he wants for at the rate things are going there won't be anything left, even for his lavish White House Parties....Angry.......U betcha !

E. Duane Howard:

And someone said to me early, "I need to cut Obama some slack"  He can have all the slack he wants for at the rate things are going there won't be anything left, even for his lavish White House Parties....Angry.......U betcha !

If it makes you feel better to vent your frustrations in the direction of Mr. Obama, by all means you should feel free to do so.  He has plenty of critics all across the country advising him on how to do his job better.  What's one more?

Clonnie, I can't seem to shake the mental pic of you stubbing your toe in the dark, and the dark and disturbing unintended results you mentioned referencing "bladder control" after said incident. I awakened in a cold sweat last night due to a nightmare, where I was in the rear car of an old wooden roller coaster, and just as we started the first major free fall, I heard you scream that you stubbed your toe from the front car. Nothing a few hours on the leather couch in some office won't cure...a little hip mo tizing, medication, maybe fasting, and I'll sleep again. So, anyway, thanks. Gip 

E. Duane Howard:

They'll pay $100.00 for ambulance transport to RMH.  I can see the the hospital from my rear deck.  It is less than a mile away and the ambulance fee is over $350.00.

E. Duane:

I’m conducting a little experiment here to see if I can respond to you in Word, then copy and paste it to the panel site. 

With respect to the ambulance fee you pay for a trip to RMH, which is apparently quite close to your home:  The fee is standard within Roanoke city, no matter where you live, and it would be the same if you lived on the northern border of the city.  The only variation is whether the transport is for BLS (basic life support) or ALS (advanced life support, and it is always the same for these two services irrespective of the amount of care you need during the trip.   I think the fee is similar for Roanoke county as well.

The reason the fee seems high is that it isn’t based on amount of service rendered (other than the BLS/ALS rating).  Transporting a working code blue with continuous CPR and all the extra resources in supplies and manpower that entails will cost the same as a person complaining of shortness of breath and some mild chest discomfort.  Transporting a patient weak and sick with flu-like symptoms will cost the same as a person with a cut finger.  By the way, don’t laugh at the cut finger – many of the calls we receive need little more than cleansing and a band-aid.  Many of them could safely be transported by cab or private vehicle, but often the patient has no car or money for a cab, or they may simply be incapable of making appropriate decisions.

The patient’s insurance and/or Medicare may pay all or part of the transport, but often no one pays, and the city has to eat the bill.  Think of the $350-plus fee as a way to cover the cost of transporting all patients, rich and poor, insurance or no insurance, critical and non-critical.   Our goal is to be at your house four minutes or less from the time that you call 911, and we’ll deliver appropriate care, whether you called for a paper cut or an immediately critical life threat.

I typed this in a 14 font so let’s see if it transfers….

 

Deb Landgraf:

I think emotion in relation to topics is a gauge of our interest level in the topic and not  something that would necessarily be visible to others when we discuss it. For example, I have less interest in discussing financial/economic issues than other topics like education. That doesn't mean I will become emotional when I discuss education. Does that make sense?

Perfect sense, Deb.  See?  You and I have agreed on something just by discussing it!  Certain subjects tug at my emotions also, even though I may try hard to be cold and analytical about them.  I think Joe made an excellent point (I forgot how he said it) about the ego. If we make an effort not to take disagreement personally, we'll all get along better.  I state my thoughts and opinions seriously (well, usually), but I try not to take myself too seriously.  I'm also resolved not to worry too much about what anyone thinks of me or my opinions.  I'm just gonna be me, and if you think I'm wrong, show me where.  I promise not to get mad at you, and who knows -- your reasoning may get past my biases and pre-conceived notions and set me straight.  Once in a blue moon it might even work the other way as well, but we'll both be better for the effort regardless.

"My problem with chess was that all my pieces wanted to end the game as soon as possible."  Dave Barry

Dave Hanson:

I agree it is not only possible but common to have spirited debates that are rational.  An academic argument can be lively and assertive.  It's more a matter of content and purpose than style.  The content of an academic argument should be facts and logical reasoning, not opinion and emotion.  The purpose should be establishing the truth, not wearing down the opponent.  Whether you "win" an academic argument should be because of the merits of your position and should have nothing to do with your passion or aggressiveness and rhetorical skills.

P.S.  You're not contributing to my stress.  This is a relaxing diversion... Adding to my stress is the fact that I am chairing an accreditation committee for a college in Florida next week, so I have my usual work for this week, plus making arrangements for my classes to get along without me next week, and preparing for my site visit.

 

Dave,

We are in agreement on academic arguments!! Here is where our discussion continues to drift: How does VoV fit the mold of an academic argument? VoV is an academic argument, but more as I told Clonnie--it is a process. Our research and academic arguments are crucial to the final product--our writings for the Sunday op-ed page. Despite the panels lack of diversity, we each have our own political leanings, beliefs, values, and life circumstances, etc. I think the crux of the matter for me is that we bring our political leanings, personal beliefs, values, and life circumstances into our academic discussions and research during the week, but in the end write for the Horizon section opinion page. I don't think you would disagree with any of this. Try not to get stressed about the accreditation work in Florida next week!

Deb

Gibson Brown:

I can't seem to shake the mental pic of you stubbing your toe in the dark

Success!  This is how those rich and famous celebrities do it, Gip.  We have to find a way to make such an impression on everyone that they can't get us out of their minds.  Once that happens, we can begin to manufacture and market merchandise with our names on it, and we'll both become millionaires!  Once that happens, we can buy our own panel and run it the way we want to.  We'll choose the topics and word them the way we want to.  We'll have fame, fortune, but most of all, power!  We'll hire one or two of the panelists to ghost write a book about our success story, then get Sarah Palin to write the foreword.  The world, and maybe even the Roanoke valley will be at our feet. (Hmmm, should I have capitalized "valley?")  No matter -- once we're rich we can hire all the editors we want.   (Picture me grinning like Boris Karloff and rubbing my hands together, here.) 

Clonnie Yearout:

Perfect sense, Deb.  See?  You and I have agreed on something just by discussing it!  Certain subjects tug at my emotions also, even though I may try hard to be cold and analytical about them.  I think Joe made an excellent point (I forgot how he said it) about the ego. If we make an effort not to take disagreement personally, we'll all get along better.  I state my thoughts and opinions seriously (well, usually), but I try not to take myself too seriously.  I'm also resolved not to worry too much about what anyone thinks of me or my opinions.  I'm just gonna be me, and if you think I'm wrong, show me where.  I promise not to get mad at you, and who knows -- your reasoning may get past my biases and pre-conceived notions and set me straight.  Once in a blue moon it might even work the other way as well, but we'll both be better for the effort regardless.

"My problem with chess was that all my pieces wanted to end the game as soon as possible."  Dave Barry

 

Clonnie,

We need to mark the calendars that we agreed!!! It is always fine to disagree too. I think you are exactly right about not taking anything personally on VoV. I hope no one does. I know I simply enjoy the process of discussing topics--some topics more than others. I think most panelists enjoy the discussions, but we have all had topics that we felt more passionate about. I especially like your statement: "I promise not to get mad at you, and who knows -- your reasoning may get past my biases and pre-conceived notions and set me straight.  Once in a blue moon it might even work the other way as well, but we'll both be better for the effort regardless." Hopefully Clonnie, you will convince me and others, or at least help us better understand an issue, more than once in a blue moon! Listening is a great skill. 

P.S. I love the chess quote and can relate! Ken and I often have an ongoing chess game. We move a paperweight to let the other know it is their turn. A game can take a few days. 

Deb

 

My goodness no, Mr. Howard, I detest AOL and the monopolistic way they treat “clients”.  I would sooner give up the internet than go with AOL.

 

I found those tips online because I thought you mentioned having AOL.

 

I cannot find any controls in the VOV using Mozilla or Internet Explorer to change the font size and the write, cut and paste only works in Internet Explorer and I am a Mozilla gal.

 

Please contact AOL tech support because I KNOW that you can change the way you read the pages but only someone with more computer knowledge than I can help you and “talk you through” the steps. 

 

Don’t give up; your comments are valuable to me.

 

Clonnie Yearout:

Marvin Foster:

As someone who supports charitible giving, but not the United Way, I am in agreement with you.  I prefer to select where my charity $ go without government approval or control and where I can look at how they are being used.

Wow, Marvin,.  Takes some guts to admit something like that.  I agree with you and have followed the same policy, but it's really un-American of us to snub the United Way.  I feel like a pariah every year when I put that zero on the form and turn it back in.  They won't let you politely refuse -- you have to accept and handle the form, all printed out with your name on it.  I like Joe's method (after I figured it out) but I'm more inclined to give to situations where I'm confident that the need is genuine.  Just get the money to them without them knowing where it came from. 

David is right when he says that I'm probably very unlikely to contribute to scary ladies pushing shopping carts, and maybe that signals a character deficiency on my part.  Fortunately we have both the United Fund and the Untied fund -- as well as local, state, federal, and world governments -- to take care of those people.

 

Clonnie and Joe,

I reluctantly gave to United Way in my early working years until I developed the courage to say "NO" even under the duress many companies put on their people.  Having worked with many local companies as clients, it was really disgusting to see the pressure some of them put on their people with individual meetings with their managers to "discuss" their contributions.

Unlike Joe, I do get a good feeling from contributing to causes I feel strongly about.  I always check a couple of web sites to see how their funds are used before giving.  I also never give to telephone solicitations because they want an immediate response that does not give one time to research the organization and usually the solicitators are getting most of the money.

I really hate the new IRS requirements for receipts for anything on which a tax deduction is claimed, not because I want to claim anything I don't really give, but because it prohibits taking a deduction on some of the causes I would most like to help like needy individuals.  But I guess that is just more big government intrusion and control. 

 

 

Deb Landgraf:

In addition, the Times reports that millions of beneficiaries also could experience higher premiums for drug coverage under Medicare Part D because there are no laws that prevent such an increase."

Deb Landgraf:

However, about 25% of Medicare beneficiaries are not protected by this law and could see their premiums increase.

 

Deb,

Thanks for finding the details on this.  That is what I had read somewhere, but couldn't locate the source.  I believe most of the 25% are the high income individuals who have to pay higher premiums anyway, so can't feel too much sympathy for them.  But Part D not being under the same rules will cost some recipients more.