Re: I need help explaining basic linguistic concepts to a lay person


Heidi Graw wrote:
> >"Jayne Kulikauskas" <jayne.kulikauskas@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> >news:1138029695.891988.243370@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> (snip)
>
> >Jayne wrote:
> > I'm pretty sure she isn't stupid. I've seen her converse intelligently
> > on many subjects. I see the problem as Heidi having no understanding
> > of the value (or limitations) of expertise. She appears to believe
> > that all opinions are equally valid. I think it's a post-modernism
> > thing.
>
> Jayne, it's not so much that I believe all opinions are valid, but rather
> just as you say I'm considering "the value (or limitations) of expertise."
> Quite often we do see professionals disagree with one another. I'm also
> keenly aware that experts don't know everything even if it involves their
> own specialized field of interest. And when I see that happening, I tend to
> remain "non-commital" until such a time as one of those professionals comes
> up with something that just makes an enormous amount of sense to me.

But, in this case, you clearly don't have enough background knowledge
to assess the relative merits of what people are saying. Using what
makes sense to you as your criterion is not working. You are making a
fool of yourself.

> There have been occasions when I've sided with someone, only to switch my
> opinion once additional or new information came to light. As for
> limitations of expertise, we see that over and over again. One thing I try
> not to do is to allow someone's initials behind their names to colour my
> perception. Just because someone may have that PhD doesn't mean they are an
> authority on anything at all. I look at what they are writing. What is it
> they are trying to say? If what they write makes sense, fine. If not, I
> dismiss it.

In order to get a PhD one must be an authority on something. I gather
that you do not have much formal post-secondary education. You really
don't seem to understand how and what people learn at university.

> Sometimes I take the time to read assorted philosophical works.
> Well...LOL...now there's a field that greatly amuses me. Some of the
> nuttiest ideas are celebrated as enlightened and intelligent thinking. When
> I come across things like that, I just have to laugh and think to myself,
> "Just how much more retarded can such a philosopher be?" If one has the
> wealth and the connections, one can have the most dumbest things promoted as
> intelligent. Oh well...sometimes I can't help but think we're all
> passengers on that Narrenschiff. ;-)

Linguistics is a science; philosophy is not. You ought not to be
judging them the same way.

Jayne

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: I need help explaining basic linguistic concepts to a lay person
    ... I see the problem as Heidi having no understanding ... > of the value of expertise. ... Jayne, it's not so much that I believe all opinions are valid, but rather ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: What women find pleasing in men...
    ... Heidi Graw wrote: ... >>Jayne wrote: ... >> I mentioned that I don't think that women ought to ... The "REAL" in their name is a acronym for "Realistic, Equal, ...
    (soc.men)
  • Re: Ive got a song going through my head
    ... Heidi Graw wrote: ... She is still posting and posting and posting about ... > King Hyerdahl commeth! ... > Jayne, I believe you have some grovelling to do. ...
    (soc.men)
  • Re: Are Men Cleverer Than Women?
    ... Heidi Graw wrote: ... >>Jayne wrote: ... >> I do not recall any posts in soc.men that match the ... Why should I try to persuade Andre to do anything he doesn't want to? ...
    (soc.men)