winner.
May 5th, 2006
Prolegomena.
As a preparatory note to my brief discourse on attempts to display a witticism, the following comments I believe to be worth the making; if you find them unnecessarily vindictive or bitingly offensive, then you should consider yourself the product of an oversensitivity complex, undoubtedly encouraged by the mind-numbing magic of global, moral inclusivism. Instead of actually dealing with our own issues, (and for those of you with a Christian conscience I am in no way demeaning the grace of Christ; case in point: the book of Matthew) we revert to an insipid co-existence with our grievous, how should I say this…sins. Somehow, we each craft our own Wonderland, and while we imagine and, indeed, believe we are living a comfortable existence of happy amusement, we are in reality dwelling in filth. I can’t be convinced that it’s O.K. that I sin or even that I’m a sinner. Paul would have been appalled at that idea. It’s foolishness to suppose that that concept is anything better than spit on the cross. It’s because I know I’m a sinner that points me to the knowledge that I need saving. And it is precisely because of the saving that I find the very cause for which Christ perished all the more vile, wicked, and deserving of my utmost, extreme hatred.
So if you read this and discover you can’t handle critique, whether moral or intellectual, from an anonymous, nameless, faceless, observer, who knows all of you least of all, then I’m sure a community circle gathering will be shortly convening at Starbucks, where a grande mocha frappacino will soothe your overly-perturbed nerves.
If competition draws out essence, then, frankly, I’m mostly disappointed by the posts summarized in the following categories.
Vulgarity. Not only is it a dismal reminder of blight of thoughtlessness, but it’s cheap, bawdy, shallow humor. After reading some of the posts, I felt like I’d just paid a dime to watch a pimp do 30 seconds of stand-up comedy. Or worse, like I’d been exposed to a Mel Brooks film festival. You might get a sudden rush of laughter from your audience, but they’re not improved by it. Some of them probably even feel a bit grimier after the experience.
Imitations. I’d rather grind my teeth on a sidewalk than plagiarize. A copied adage shouldn’t strike you as a form of wit, it should embarrass you as a being capable of dreams. A bird will chirp the Star-Spangled Banner if he hears it enough, but he’ll never conceive of creating something like the Sistine Chapel, or design a helicopter, or write like Whitman. That’s why parrots are cheap, and the Mona Lisa priceless.
Half-heartedness. Again, a function of the collegiate carelessness. I’ve never met so many brilliant people in one place than in college, and I’ve never met so many lazy people in one place than in college. Surely, effort is not always measured by the quantity of the output (in this particular venue: words), but the quality is necessarily proportionate to the degree of effort. Wit can certainly be a sudden showing, but it is a sudden showing of a mind well-trained. True, it is a simple contest and one you might not seriously consider or care about. But then why participate and degrade the competition and the giver of the competition with lousy posts?
Something of yourself is communicated in every word, thought, and expression. Thus, we can rightly call our language alive or “living.†Truly, we “live†in our words. Thus, they are, every one of them, judged eternally. It seems appropriate, then, to count them precious and value them as instruments, as organic conduits to accomplish an end. But, in fact, they’re not just means; they’re an end in themselves. Words produce effects and they are effects. They result in and they are the result of, for from the overflow of the heart, the mouth speaks.
I know I haven’t given a real witticism yet (unless something above merits “witâ€), and that I’ve only engaged in categorical criticisms (yet another form of “easy†conversation). But I’m not really trying to win the competition; I’m trying to improve the nature of the participants and participation.
Still, it is on this final note I close:
If you so wish to win but won’t will to change the work of your words with which you writ’ your wit with, I pithy you.
4 Responses
-
j smyth May 5, 2006 at 9:39 am
-
Wingman May 6, 2006 at 5:34 am
So, I just took a study break at 4:30 in the morning and, for whatever reason decided to check out the blog to see who won. I did not realize I was going to be treated to such profound argumentative discourse. Steen, your sagacity has left me awe-struck. I wish I had the fortitude to give a real response to your post, but I am a victim of “collegiate laziness” and I’d rather spend my time working on my thesis that’s due monday. However, I will atleast humor you with a list of the informal fallacies committed in your “Prolegomena.” I’ll use the latin terms for all that I can remember, since you seem to find big words impressive. So here goes: (Please excuse all the spelling errors that are about to occur in regards to the Latin.)
“if you find them unnecessarily vindictive or bitingly offensive, then you should consider yourself the product of an oversensitivity complex, undoubtedly encouraged by the mind-numbing magic of global, moral inclusivism” — ad hominem, abusive
“consider yourself the product of an oversensitivity complex” — tu quoque
“It’s foolishness to suppose that that concept is anything better than spit on the cross” — argumentum ad misericordium
“So if you read this and discover you can’t handle critique, whether moral or intellectual, from an anonymous, nameless, faceless, observer, who knows all of you least of all, then I’m sure a community circle gathering will be shortly convening at Starbucks, where a grande mocha frappacino will soothe your overly-perturbed nerves.” — ad hominem, abusive (repeat offense)
“After reading some of the posts, I felt like I’d just paid a dime to watch a pimp do 30 seconds of stand-up comedy” — fallacy of weak analogy (sorry I can’t remember the latin) on the grounds that you didn’t “pay” any monetary amount to read these posts, you simply chose to spend your time thusly, unless you are still on pay by the minute AOL dial up, in which case you are guilty of the fallacy of living in 1994.
“why participate and degrade the competition and the giver of the competition with lousy posts?” — ignoration elenchi
“Something of yourself is communicated in every word, thought, and expression. Thus, we can rightly call our language alive or “living.†Truly, we “live†in our words. Thus, they are, every one of them, judged eternally.” — petitio principii (2x back to back, but i’ll let you slide on the repeat offense, since you were basically restating your syllogism.)
“But I’m not really trying to win the competition; I’m trying to improve the nature of the participants and participation.” — fallacy of pretending to have altruistic motives (yeah i just made that one up, but it fits)
The entire post — fallacy of converse accident (sorry, I can’t remember the latin for this one either) and ignoratio elenchi.
If you’d like an explanation of any of these, i’d be glad to give them to you after I finish my thesis.
And if you are wondering, I am aware that my rebuttal is full of fallacies as well, most notably the informal fallacy of “me being a douchebag and getting worked up over something entirely inconseequential”
To be honest, Steen, I actually agree with a lot of what you have to say. However, I very adamantly disagree with the way in which you said it, and the context in which you stated it.
Regardless, you seem to be a pretty intelligent guy, so i’ll offer you this advice, love someone before you criticize them.
I know I haven’t exaclty followed this line of thinking in my rebuttal to you, but then again, as I stated before, I’m a douchebag. -
Totally Radical!!!!
-
wow. to all of the above.
This is an interesting comment/submission to the sweepstakes. I’m not sure who it is or if they are even being serious with this comment. i’m probably just giving them the satisfaction they seek with this short reply. What’s interesting to me is that they took offense to our lack of effort in this sweepstakes and called it a result of our collegiate laziness. Interesting, i thought. interesting because they actually expect me or the rest of us (friends of tbrooks) to spend an unnecessary amount of brain energy into a silly blog competition that derived because taylor thought no one read his blog. maybe in the last few days i used my intelligence on the real things in life. but maybe you are right…maybe i should pour out all of my effort on blog comments so that i lack the creativity to pour into the things that actually require maximum creative juice. (that was a sarcastic sentence.) Whatever the case, it appears that you are upset that college students didn’t give 100% effort into a blog comment. To that, i say “thank God.” Because maybe there’s a chance they’re give the effort to something of true value. It’s not about winning the sweepstakes, it’s about letting tbrooks know that he and his blog are both loved by his great college friends.