Comments on: Marmot in The Economist http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/06/29/marmot-in-the-economist/ Korea... in Blog Format Fri, 5 Sep 2008 07:16:20 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1 By: gbnhj http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/06/29/marmot-in-the-economist/#comment-95070 gbnhj Thu, 05 Jul 2007 12:55:13 +0000 http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/06/29/marmot-in-the-economist/#comment-95070 abcdefg, what's bothering you - that I'm right to simply question your substitution of terms; that the two terms actually describe different groups and so cannot be used in place of one another; or that you can't correctly identify a strawman attack (although you seem able to use an ad hominem attack)? I'm done here, btw, but by all means type away - I'm sure you've got lots more to say. abcdefg, what’s bothering you - that I’m right to simply question your substitution of terms; that the two terms actually describe different groups and so cannot be used in place of one another; or that you can’t correctly identify a strawman attack (although you seem able to use an ad hominem attack)?

I’m done here, btw, but by all means type away - I’m sure you’ve got lots more to say.

]]> By: Robert Koehler http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/06/29/marmot-in-the-economist/#comment-95057 Robert Koehler Thu, 05 Jul 2007 09:52:19 +0000 http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/06/29/marmot-in-the-economist/#comment-95057 Robert, do you really wear a hanbok in your daily life? Yep. If so, may I ask why? Don’t know. I just like’ em, I guess. <b>F R E A K</b> <h2>BANNED</h2> Robert, do you really wear a hanbok in your daily life?

Yep.

If so, may I ask why?

Don’t know. I just like’ em, I guess.

F R E A K

BANNED

]]> By: peninsular aborigine http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/06/29/marmot-in-the-economist/#comment-95055 peninsular aborigine Thu, 05 Jul 2007 09:35:50 +0000 http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/06/29/marmot-in-the-economist/#comment-95055 Amen. Amen.

]]> By: neastud http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/06/29/marmot-in-the-economist/#comment-95054 neastud Thu, 05 Jul 2007 09:23:05 +0000 http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/06/29/marmot-in-the-economist/#comment-95054 Robert, do you really wear a hanbok in your daily life? Yep. If so, may I ask why? Don’t know. I just like’ em, I guess. <b> F R E A K </b> Robert, do you really wear a hanbok in your daily life?

Yep.

If so, may I ask why?

Don’t know. I just like’ em, I guess.

F R E A K

]]> By: Robert Koehler http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/06/29/marmot-in-the-economist/#comment-94787 Robert Koehler Wed, 04 Jul 2007 00:26:50 +0000 http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/06/29/marmot-in-the-economist/#comment-94787 <blockquote>Robert, do you really wear a hanbok in your daily life? </blockquote> Yep. <blockquote>If so, may I ask why?</blockquote> Don't know. I just like' em, I guess.

Robert, do you really wear a hanbok in your daily life?

Yep.

If so, may I ask why?

Don’t know. I just like’ em, I guess.

]]> By: michael http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/06/29/marmot-in-the-economist/#comment-94778 michael Wed, 04 Jul 2007 00:12:01 +0000 http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/06/29/marmot-in-the-economist/#comment-94778 Sonagi, you just don't get it. abcdefg is invoking of "deterritorialization" as a recursive, rhizomatic means of problematizing the post-Lacanian Other. Seeing this gradation of Althusserian neocolonial critique, one might question the original paucity of thought as an isolated incident, rather than one that encodes the dominant ideologies and power relations of the culture that produced it. abcdefg engages in a subtle subverions of expat "phallogocentritheatricality" using the Cixousian supplement of the Derridean "text." Got it? :) Sonagi, you just don’t get it. abcdefg is invoking of “deterritorialization” as a recursive, rhizomatic means of problematizing the post-Lacanian Other. Seeing this gradation of Althusserian neocolonial critique, one might question the original paucity of thought as an isolated incident, rather than one that encodes the dominant ideologies and power relations of the culture that produced it. abcdefg engages in a subtle subverions of expat “phallogocentritheatricality” using the Cixousian supplement of the Derridean “text.”

Got it? :)

]]> By: abcdefg http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/06/29/marmot-in-the-economist/#comment-94773 abcdefg Tue, 03 Jul 2007 23:44:10 +0000 http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/06/29/marmot-in-the-economist/#comment-94773 Not supported is not same thing as untenable. And I don't finally concede anything. I defer it. Likewise, I write "factually justifiable" which is not the same thing as "factually justified." <blockquote>And let’s not forget the misapplication of the term “strawman argument.”</blockquote> And you forget that's the bull I'm criticizing you for. Let's go through this again. When a person 1) admonishes that I should "refrain" from doing something based on informaiton that has absolutely no importance to me or relevance to my position in a dispute, and 2) shows absolutely no awareness of the impertinence of that information, "strawman" is the first observation any "reasonable and logic-minded" individual should make. That's no misapplication. Perhaps it is in your stuffy little world of self-importance. But you're presuming this mode of reason of yours is something I take seriously. Ultimately, if gbnhj is only disputing "expat" from the stance of terminology, he needs to understand that he didn't make that clear when he should have, and he neglects to see the purpose of responding to comment 30 was in part to determine what his angle is. In general, it's the point of discussion: Give a view, revise a view if untrue. Nobody here has misunderstood "straw man". To claim I have is as absurd as it is obnoxious. Not supported is not same thing as untenable. And I don’t finally concede anything. I defer it. Likewise, I write “factually justifiable” which is not the same thing as “factually justified.”

And let’s not forget the misapplication of the term “strawman argument.”

And you forget that’s the bull I’m criticizing you for.

Let’s go through this again. When a person 1) admonishes that I should “refrain” from doing something based on informaiton that has absolutely no importance to me or relevance to my position in a dispute, and 2) shows absolutely no awareness of the impertinence of that information, “strawman” is the first observation any “reasonable and logic-minded” individual should make. That’s no misapplication. Perhaps it is in your stuffy little world of self-importance. But you’re presuming this mode of reason of yours is something I take seriously.

Ultimately, if gbnhj is only disputing “expat” from the stance of terminology, he needs to understand that he didn’t make that clear when he should have, and he neglects to see the purpose of responding to comment 30 was in part to determine what his angle is. In general, it’s the point of discussion: Give a view, revise a view if untrue. Nobody here has misunderstood “straw man”. To claim I have is as absurd as it is obnoxious.

]]> By: Sonagi http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/06/29/marmot-in-the-economist/#comment-94753 Sonagi Tue, 03 Jul 2007 17:11:14 +0000 http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/06/29/marmot-in-the-economist/#comment-94753 <i>"Which is not tenable, S, unless you’re unlike me and you welcome a high threshold of bullshit for the views you espouse. "</i> As opposed to untenable statements like this one (boldface mine): <i>"“ESL teacher” is a <b>factually justifiable</b> stand-in for expat since it’s true that most expats in Korea are or once were ESL teachers."</i> You finally conceded there was no factual evidence to support your generalization after the second time I challenged you to provide some. And let's not forget the misapplication of the term "strawman argument." Keep sputtering, abc. “Which is not tenable, S, unless you’re unlike me and you welcome a high threshold of bullshit for the views you espouse. “

As opposed to untenable statements like this one (boldface mine):

““ESL teacher” is a factually justifiable stand-in for expat since it’s true that most expats in Korea are or once were ESL teachers.”

You finally conceded there was no factual evidence to support your generalization after the second time I challenged you to provide some. And let’s not forget the misapplication of the term “strawman argument.” Keep sputtering, abc.

]]> By: Dustin http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/06/29/marmot-in-the-economist/#comment-94742 Dustin Tue, 03 Jul 2007 15:01:14 +0000 http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/06/29/marmot-in-the-economist/#comment-94742 Robert, do you really wear a hanbok in your daily life? If so, may I ask why? I do not mean this question disrespectfully, I am just sincerely curious. Thanks. Robert, do you really wear a hanbok in your daily life? If so, may I ask why? I do not mean this question disrespectfully, I am just sincerely curious. Thanks.

]]> By: abcdefg http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/06/29/marmot-in-the-economist/#comment-94659 abcdefg Mon, 02 Jul 2007 23:06:58 +0000 http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/06/29/marmot-in-the-economist/#comment-94659 "Gbnhj’s words preceding yours are <b>merely</b> expressing his strong disagreement with your words and did not misrepresent your views <b>at all.</b>" Which is not tenable, S, unless you're unlike me and you welcome a high threshold of bullshit for the views you espouse. The problem is that g is not even arguing with my views at all and shows no consciousnesss of it. If he is going for a subtler position, one that only relates to mine in a roundabout way, he has a funny way of doing it. Then again sifting out what the heck was going on in 30 was the point of responding. Anyway, have the majority of expats in Korea (the subset of them important to my comments here) worked as ESL teachers (in Korea)? I don't think it's unreasonable to believe it. But is it actually true? It's true I presumed it in my comment but I don't know for certain and grant that I may be wrong. But I'd like to know. If anyone is willing to dig up some links for or against, then be my guest. “Gbnhj’s words preceding yours are merely expressing his strong disagreement with your words and did not misrepresent your views at all.”

Which is not tenable, S, unless you’re unlike me and you welcome a high threshold of bullshit for the views you espouse. The problem is that g is not even arguing with my views at all and shows no consciousnesss of it. If he is going for a subtler position, one that only relates to mine in a roundabout way, he has a funny way of doing it. Then again sifting out what the heck was going on in 30 was the point of responding.

Anyway, have the majority of expats in Korea (the subset of them important to my comments here) worked as ESL teachers (in Korea)? I don’t think it’s unreasonable to believe it. But is it actually true? It’s true I presumed it in my comment but I don’t know for certain and grant that I may be wrong. But I’d like to know. If anyone is willing to dig up some links for or against, then be my guest.

]]>