![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 9 to 33 of 34. Go back in thread:
Posted by ambrosialdelight on March 3, 2002, at 14:59:27
In reply to Dinah reply, posted by trouble on February 24, 2002, at 16:07:50
I am suprised the response below made it past the radar given the very offensive content at the end (which I have replaced with asterisks, such things make me feel sick and angry).
-> I know, I quake like that too and it tears me up, it goes totally against my image. But there's a certain rare kind of authority figure that makes wet noodles out of people who've been destroyed by usual authority and Dr. Bob's got the thing down to an art form. So I worry about crossing him, and that's *new* so I'm like ohmygod am I crossing him, is this out of bounds would this make him frown, and y'know I don't resent having these concerns, I only wish I could extend them to real psychologists and not just phantoms.
> Anyway my post was a 7 word response to someeone elses and in it I referred to ************************. What do you think?
>
> thanks for your response.
Posted by ambrosialdelight on March 3, 2002, at 15:01:43
In reply to Re: Dinah reply, posted by ambrosialdelight on March 3, 2002, at 14:59:27
look who's colored now.
Posted by ambrosialdelight on March 3, 2002, at 15:27:41
In reply to Re: Dinah reply, posted by ambrosialdelight on March 3, 2002, at 14:59:27
In case you're wondering what made the phrase offensive, it was the word "those"...just think of someone referring to you are "Those something or other" sucks doesn't it?
Posted by trouble on March 3, 2002, at 17:50:59
In reply to those, posted by ambrosialdelight on March 3, 2002, at 15:27:41
> In case you're wondering what made the phrase offensive, it was the word "those"...just think of someone referring to you are "Those something or other" sucks doesn't it?
I refer you, wearily I refer you to the definition below marked "irony"
trouble
Posted by ambrosialdelight on March 3, 2002, at 21:27:08
In reply to Re: those, posted by trouble on March 3, 2002, at 17:50:59
if you say one thing and mean something else, you introduce too many variables and distort the message. be direct. say exacly what you mean, that's efficient.
Posted by ambrosialdelight on March 3, 2002, at 21:34:27
In reply to Re: those, posted by trouble on March 3, 2002, at 17:50:59
naturally I take everything at face value. If you don't mean to say something, then don't say it. No more, no less.
Posted by ambrosialdelight on March 3, 2002, at 21:57:36
In reply to Re: those, posted by trouble on March 3, 2002, at 17:50:59
I wonder was irony your intention, or are you bringing it up for the purpose of damage control? If you offend others without meaning to, you still offend. No amount of flowers will make it smell better.
Posted by trouble on March 4, 2002, at 2:38:15
In reply to face value, posted by ambrosialdelight on March 3, 2002, at 21:34:27
If you take everything at face value my advice to you is to skip posts signed by me. I do find it curious that you consider your cognitive approach natural. Where does that come from?
trouble
Posted by trouble on March 4, 2002, at 2:44:51
In reply to irony? or damage control? » trouble, posted by ambrosialdelight on March 3, 2002, at 21:57:36
>I don't have much more to say about this, I am not one to offer explanations about my rhetorical stylings. I am, for better or worse, usually considered an ironist. I rarely write or say something w/out deliberation, but it does happen on occasion.
Incidentally, irony and satire are not about flowers and making anything smell better.
I wonder where you got that idea.
trouble>I wonder was irony your intention, or are you bringing it up for the purpose of damage control? If you offend others without meaning to, you still offend. No amount of flowers will make it smell better.
Posted by Zo on March 4, 2002, at 18:00:42
In reply to face value, posted by ambrosialdelight on March 3, 2002, at 21:34:27
>If you don't mean to say something, then don't say it. No more, no less.
Wait a minute. . .Is this a steal from Alice in Wonderland?
Zo
Posted by ambrosialdelight on March 4, 2002, at 18:31:37
In reply to Re: Alice?, posted by Zo on March 4, 2002, at 18:00:42
I did not intentionally quote Alice in Wonderland, now I have to read it again! However I have been reading and re-reading that book at least once every two years, from when I first learned to read. I always find something different or have a different picture of the same thing. I can't pass by a copy when I see one in a bookstore without touching it a lot and spending at least ten minutes with it. Curiously enough I don't own a copy, I always borrow, I guess I am still looking for the one with the prettiest pictures. It's one of the few things I have consistently enjoyed throughout my life so it's rather special.
Posted by ambrosialdelight on March 4, 2002, at 19:01:46
In reply to Re: irony? or damage control?, posted by trouble on March 4, 2002, at 2:44:51
Actually I was mainly hurt and angered by the statement that I put in asterisks in my first response on the matter. That was the point I wanted to put across and I felt that you did not acknowledge the effect of your words.
I think irony and satire are primarily decorative. They make certain things easier to say and hear. Whether those things should be said is another matter, depending largely on your awareness of your audience. Satire and irony can also be used as a mask from behind which the speaker can peer. Although I prefer to see the face of the speaker, sometimes the mask is a beautiful work of art so there is value in that.
I couldn't stop reading your postings if I was paid to try. Regarding face-value - I like things whittled down and simplified as much as possible to their purest elements, I believe that leaves little room for misinterpretation. However, I also can't resist beauty and not all beauty is simple.
Posted by Zo on March 4, 2002, at 19:46:34
In reply to Re: Alice?, posted by ambrosialdelight on March 4, 2002, at 18:31:37
I bet, then, you quoted, is it the Red Queen, unconsciously!
And, I really like your next post. Just thought I'd throw that in.
Zo
Posted by trouble on March 5, 2002, at 5:15:58
In reply to Re: irony? or damage control? » trouble, posted by ambrosialdelight on March 4, 2002, at 19:01:46
I may be being an idiot about this but my penchant for accuracy gets the best of me sometimes. Irony and satire are not about making things easier to say and hear. Not in the least little bit. These words are more than likely in a standard household dictionary.
obsessively, trouble
> I think irony and satire are primarily decorative. They make certain things easier to say and hear.
Posted by Zo on March 5, 2002, at 17:29:10
In reply to Re: irony? or damage control?, posted by trouble on March 5, 2002, at 5:15:58
You're being awfully didactic (pendantic?) for someone so ironic.
And, technically speaking, irony and satire are *exactly* what make the medicine go down.
Zo
Posted by ambrosialdelight on March 5, 2002, at 20:45:02
In reply to Re: irony? or damage control?, posted by trouble on March 5, 2002, at 5:15:58
The true meanings of things are often proven in their effects. The effect of irony and satire is exactly to make things easier to hear and say whether it be using humor or some other tool. Once again you skirt around effects. Without effect, words are no different from breath. It is important to be aware of the effects of your words both from your perspective as well as that of your audience.
Posted by ambrosialdelight on March 5, 2002, at 20:59:01
In reply to Re: Alice? » ambrosialdelight, posted by Zo on March 4, 2002, at 19:46:34
Now that you mention it, it sounds very much like the Red Queen, that's very frightening. Yikes! Now I am really gonna have to get a copy of the book! Isn't she the "Off with their heads!" person? Oh no! I need to memorize everything she says so I don't say it, some of that stuff could get someone an all expense paid vacation to the local jail!
Posted by trouble on March 6, 2002, at 3:13:28
In reply to all about effect, posted by ambrosialdelight on March 5, 2002, at 20:45:02
Posted by trouble on March 6, 2002, at 5:20:13
In reply to Re: irony? or damage control? » trouble, posted by Zo on March 5, 2002, at 17:29:10
Exactly Zo, satire makes the medicine go down, if you've got the stomach for it.
I'm not defending satire b/c I'm looking for something to talk about, I'm just responding to a challenge. Sure, I'm a pedant, in that self-taught beat poet elitist fashion that can clear a room in 30 seconds flat but dumbing myself down for fear of offending others is not an option. Displaying one's intellect may be a vulgar attempt to call attention to oneself but it's no worse than threatening suicide and puking in the parking lot which used to be what I was here for. Until I learned there's more than one way to irritate.
love, trouble
Posted by Dr. Bob on March 6, 2002, at 18:49:46
In reply to Re: irony? or damage control?, posted by trouble on March 6, 2002, at 5:20:13
> dumbing myself down for fear of offending others is not an option. Displaying one's intellect may be a vulgar attempt to call attention to oneself but it's no worse than threatening suicide and puking in the parking lot which used to be what I was here for. Until I learned there's more than one way to irritate.
You certainly don't have to dumb yourself down, but it is important here not to offend or irritate others...
Bob
Posted by ambrosialdelight on March 10, 2002, at 13:58:17
In reply to Re: irony? or damage control?, posted by trouble on March 6, 2002, at 5:20:13
Stop running around! The issue is that you made a very offensive statement, the effects of which you have not addressed. It is that statement itself and the fact that you choose not to address it that is offensive. Everything else is moot.
Posted by ambrosialdelight on March 10, 2002, at 14:09:54
In reply to Re: irony? or damage control?, posted by trouble on March 6, 2002, at 5:20:13
Intellect is not something that one has to display or prove. It's usually obvious like a nice color in a bright light to a seeing non-color blind person. Most people enjoy nice colors and are not offended. I have pointed to you directly the offensive statement in an earlier posting. I am sure you remember it.
Posted by trouble on March 10, 2002, at 14:43:42
In reply to Re: irony? or damage control? » trouble, posted by ambrosialdelight on March 10, 2002, at 13:58:17
> Stop running around! The issue is that you made a very offensive statement, the effects of which you have not addressed. It is that statement itself and the fact that you choose not to address it that is offensive. Everything else is moot.
Ambroasiadelight,
I owe you nothing. However out of generosity I will transcribe the discussion you have so graciously injected yourself into, in its totality, names have been changed to protect the vulnerable:
X: Psychiatrists are lazy, money-grubbing, pseudo-doctors whose intellects are demonstrably lower than the average medical student.
trouble's response:
Right on, X, and those colored people sure can dance.OK, ambrosiadelight? Got it now? Can you sleep now? Am I pissed at you for deliberately demonizing me over something you knew nothing about? No, not at all, this is fun for me.
trouble
Posted by trouble on March 10, 2002, at 15:00:02
In reply to intellect and such, posted by ambrosialdelight on March 10, 2002, at 14:09:54
Ambrosialelight,
I don't want to argue for the sake of argument alone, not w/real people, the television gives me ample opportunity to yell and holler just to hear my own voice.
Now, socially speaking, I am not averse to engaging in a stimulating intellectual argument for the sake of discovery, and am always on the lookout for a worthy adversary. Should you happen upon one, feel free to send him my way.kisses,
trouble
Posted by Dr. Bob on March 10, 2002, at 16:34:14
In reply to Re: irony? or damage control? » trouble, posted by ambrosialdelight on March 10, 2002, at 13:58:17
> Stop running around! The issue is that you made a very offensive statement, the effects of which you have not addressed.
Please don't post anything that others could take as accusatory or put pressure on them, thanks.
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/faq.html#civil
I do agree with you:
http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20020223/msgs/19154.html
It does suck to be referred to like that, but I let it go because I thought she was trying to make a point. Sorry you ended up feeling offended.
Bob
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Social | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.