Image via WikipediaRelated source » I'm a What?
[This related source is recommended in its entirety.]
“I write material for a specific sort of audience. […] Communication becomes distorted when you take it out of context, even if you don't change a word of the text. […] Regular readers of my blog know that the goal of my writing is to be interesting and nothing else. I'm not trying to change anyone's opinion, largely because I don't believe humans can be influenced by exposure to better arguments, even if I had some. But I do think people benefit by exposure to ideas that are different from whatever they are hearing, even when the ideas are worse. […] That approach springs from my observation that brains are like investment portfolios, where diversification is generally a good strategy. I'm not trying to move you to my point of view; I'm trying to add diversity to your portfolio of thoughts. In the short term, I hope it's stimulating enough to be entertaining. Long term, the best ideas probably come from people who have the broadest exposure to different views. Contrast my style of blogging to the most common styles, which include advocacy for some interest group or another, punditry, advice, and information. Now imagine moving my writing from the context of this blog to the context of an advocacy blog. You can see the problem. Men thought I was attacking men, and women thought I was attacking women. The message changed when the context changed. I saw that developing, so I took down the post.” [emphasis added]
— Scott Adams, Mar 27, 2011 (dilbert.com)
I shy away from meta posting; it's a matter of style. Occasionally, however, it suits my purpose to contradict myself. This, after all, is my blog, yes?
In the excerpted post (above), Scott Adams includes some general statements about his own blog-posting, which resonated with my own ideas about blogging. So I decided to (re)evaluate my modus operandi.
My blog is a venue for expressing myself, which along with reading, thinking and interacting socially with other people is an important activity of my waking hours. I enjoy it. It helps me organize my thoughts, cogitate about life, let off some steam, kid around. Did I mention it's fun? Now that I'm retired, having guilt-free fun is a high priority for me.
Frequently, I'll write about very serious issues. This is also fun, but the tone of such posts is more impassioned than my kidding around, as is my wont. Again, this is my blog; if it offends anyone, the EXIT signs here are well lit. I can only please so many people per day. This may very well be not your day. Even Tuesday might not work. How about never? Does never work for you? Oh, well.
Adams' point about "not trying to change anyone's opinion" is well taken. I have come to believe that is a hopeless and, therefore, a very frustrating goal, though I admit I once thought otherwise. People are work. You may quote me.
I see myself as a man who has accumulated a fair amount of life experiences and I believe I have learned many valuable lessons. I also believe I have acquired some knowledge that could be useful to others, and I am willing to share it. But I am very much aware that you can only lead a horse to water. And I really don't care enough to knock myself out in any attempt to persuade anyone to drink the water, with a very few select exceptions (and those only in private).
But, enough about me. How's your life going? Is that hopey-dopey workin' for ya?
Post 1,602 Meta Posting
No comments:
Post a Comment