Re: Robyn M gets an "A+"

["Robyn Miller" <lady-r@xxxxxxxxxx>]

----------
> From: Hyman Blumenstock <hystock@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: POST-KEYNESIAN THOUGHT   <pkt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: Robyn M gets an "A+"
> Date: Saturday, September 20, 1997 9:18 PM
>
> Gregoire de Nowell (ci-devant) wrote:
> >
> > For smartness and clear writing.  I wish she were studying here.
> > She gets a D- in the practical sense, however, for banging her
> > head against the wall trying to reason with...well, in the spirit
> > of PKT civility, I won't degenerate into ad hominem.  But the noun
> > I would choose would indicate neither respect nor praise.
> >
> > Greg Nowell
>
>
> And why is that Professor?  Because you are at a total loss coping with
> some original thought?  The "as hominem" is evident without saying it.
> "How dare you criticize 'holy writ' with unanswerable insight?"
> Obviously, good A+ students just recite precisely what was taught to
> them by rote, like a tape recorder, and that will surely earn a PhD, and
> create a new generation professor who will carry on the tradition of
> unresolvable Social Problems.

Hyman,

You've got to be kidding!  I've spent the greater part of my college life
challenging those who seem far too certain of things they've thought far
too little about (including grad students and profs).  To characterize me
as some sort of intellectual sycophant is so totally misguided as to be
laughable.  I would also suggest that in chastising Greg de Nowell for his
indirect ad hominem remark you have engaged in exactly the behavior you
were you were so disgusted with; you made massive, abjectly incorrect
assumptions about the person whom Greg's note referred to and felt that
those sufficed to impugn her arguments - I believe that is typically
referred to as an "ad hominem," attack no?

Also, while insisting on the importance of challenging the assumptions of
those in the "Economic Establishment," you have so far proved yourself
entirely unwilling to entertain challenges to your own assumptions.  This
reeks of hypocrisy.  Please get your own house in order before hurling
stones around.  I am definitely no ideologue.  A powerful, well-reasoned
argument will always cause me to reexamine my premises and assumptions.  In
fact,  having my "intellectual foundations" rocked makes me feel alive, and
being graciously proven wrong can be a vauluable learning experience that I
would actively seek just to keep from getting too sure of myself (and maybe
missing somthing important due to my arrogance).  I gain at least some
valuable food-for-thought from most intelligent discussions, but gain
nothing from the uninformed personal attacks of toal strangers.  Lets keep
this kind of thing to a minimum, okay?



Robyn M.

PS. I will make every attempt not to respond in the future to attacks on my
character/intellect. Posts of the type that I have responded to (and, of
course posts like my own response) should probably be kept to a minimum for
this forum to work. I'll try to do my part.
>
> Hyman