Thank you, Olulabelle, for making the distinction between "I feel" and "I think." "I feel that..." almost invariably means "I think this thing, but I don't want it to be subject to critique."
So, on the basis of how I have seen interactions with Haus and various others proceed, I think the following things. In expressing them, I am making conjectures about some people's emotional states and motivations which are hidden from me. If I am wrong about them, please correct me. (I have bolded certain key phrases to provide some contrast and help make the text visually easier to read.)
I think that Haus is often a target for various people's anger, because he often takes it upon himself to engage with people in a mode which they are not prepared for— namely, that of a teacher challenging a student to become more rigorous in hir thinking. Personally, I appreciate that when it occurs, but if one is not in that mindset already, it can throw one off one's stride, and I accept that various people react in different ways to that. There may be some question as to whether anyone has the right, or the responsibility, to engage in this kind of dynamic. To help answer that, we should bear in mind that there is no hierarchy being enforced here— anyone can theoretically be a teacher, and we all are at some times students.
I think that Haus, while being admirably qualified to do this challenging in almost all cases in which he engages in it, is not always perfectly suited to doing it, because I think that he sometimes fails to meet his "students" where they are at. I think that while he knows that all people come to barbelith with different backgrounds, different ability levels, and different intentions, he does not always take this into account in speaking to others. This leads to frustration on his part, I believe, which is translated in his posts.
I think that this frustration does sometimes lead Haus into ad hominem attacks which in a cooler moment he would disown. I have usually seen it in cases where someone has seemed to me to be attacking or baiting him. That doesn't excuse him of the responsibility for his words; his words also don't excuse his interlocutor from the responsibility for attacking or baiting him. Even if no attack was intended, the perception of one can escalate arguments which are unpleasant for the rest of us to witness, so if you find that someone is perceiving an attack that you didn't intend, please have the goodness to say something like "I didn't intend to attack you; I'm sorry," and rephrase your argument.
I think that many people do not wish to be challenged to think more rigorously, and this is unfortunate for them, because I observe that it has been established over many years that barbelith is to be a place where this occurs. I think it is entirely appropriate for people to be made aware that this is within the existing remit of the boards. If barbelith members want to adjust this remit to exclude such challenges, we can talk about that, but I will personally resist that kind of change.
I think that some people wish to be challenged to think more rigorously, but have a lot invested in being right. In fact, I know this to be the case because this describes me well. This makes a challenge to their mode of thinking potentially painful. The way in which Haus challenges people does not always take this into account.
I think Haus sees a responsibility to the boards to keep making these challenges, in order to keep barbelith a place where people are expected to think rigorously. I think he sees less, or no, responsibility to have particular care for people's feelings when he makes these challenges. These are valid perspectives— it could be argued that we cannot control the feelings of others, and thus we have a responsibility only to express ourselves in as polite a fashion as required by circumstances and avoid intentional ad hominem attacks. I have a different perspective, however; I think that my responsibility to challenge people depends on meeting them where they are and delivering the message in a way which will enable them to hear it. I am not always good at doing this— in fact, if you look at the history of my posting, I am more hit-or-miss than Haus is; while sometimes I have been successful, at other times I have been more sarcastic and condescending than Haus usually is, and with less cause. However, I am not frequently a target as Haus is. I don't know why this should be.
I think that if people are feeling hurt, attacked, confused, embarrassed, or resentful because of the way anyone on the board is expressing hirself, they have a responsibility of their own to express these feelings clearly, instead of only reacting to them. I would like for people to take it upon themselves to learn how and practice doing this. I will endeavor to do this myself— the last time I consciously tried it, I was told that I was being condescending, so I may need to find some more effective technique.
I think that no one on these boards is always right, is always perfect, is always good at communicating. I think that instead of assigning greater responsibility to established posters, or making judgments about a person's character on the basis of one or two interactions, or dismissing an argument based more on who we judge the poster to be rather than what they are saying and why, we would all benefit from keeping this fallibility in mind.
I feel frustrated when I think I see Haus use his considerable intelligence and knowledge to engage with people in a way which I myself, in my ideal world, wouldn't. I think I sometimes fail to acknowledge that it's perfectly okay for Haus and myself to have different strategies even though we seem to share the same goals. I also feel frustrated when I see people arguing a position which I think is untenable, but I don't myself have the skill to explain why. I feel sympathetic when I see posters react in frustration against what they seem to perceive as an overwhelming attack for no good reason, but I also feel angry when I see posts which espouse arguments which are based in racist thinking which the poster refuses to acknowledge or even consider. Sometimes, as with DM, this sympathy and this anger are in tension with one another, and this makes it difficult to know how to respond.
I have never, that I can recall, PMed anyone and said "I think Haus is wrong and is being mean to you." I have once, that I can recall, PMed Haus and said something like I thought he could have expressed himself differently to better effect, and I believe it was to do with an exchange with you, DM. Our difference was stylistic and strategic, and had nothing to do with content. If I have concerns for how Haus is comporting himself on the boards, he can rest assured that he will hear about them from me directly; the same goes for everyone else. Any such communication is intended in the spirit of respect and cooperation, and unless I explicitly say so has no bearing on my esteem for anyone personally. |
