Dee - fense!
Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2009 12:05 pm
On the business of defense
Refer to the challenger as a troll, an energy vampire, one possessed by a flyer or some other foreign "power", not themselves, whose only purpose is to disrupt and thereby to entertain.
Problem is, when the one being challenged is logically placed in a corner and asked to defend the basis of their beliefs, and they claim the challenger is an Agent Smith, they are defending something indefensible.
Why do they not deal with the points of the discussion? Perhaps what they hold near and dear is not defensible after all. Seems to me if it is a valid belief (whatever that is) and if they have given it some thought, they will be comfortable in its defense, rather than rabid in denigrating the challenger.
Refer to the challenger as a troll, an energy vampire, one possessed by a flyer or some other foreign "power", not themselves, whose only purpose is to disrupt and thereby to entertain.
Problem is, when the one being challenged is logically placed in a corner and asked to defend the basis of their beliefs, and they claim the challenger is an Agent Smith, they are defending something indefensible.
Why do they not deal with the points of the discussion? Perhaps what they hold near and dear is not defensible after all. Seems to me if it is a valid belief (whatever that is) and if they have given it some thought, they will be comfortable in its defense, rather than rabid in denigrating the challenger.