[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
On Wed, 2002-02-20 at 18:11, someone wrote:
> I expect that the people who are making the [XYZ] argument
> are primarily trying to promote an agenda instead of thinking critically
> about their statements which is rather unfortunate.
I'm not sure that any of that is unfortunate. I suspect that everyone
here has an agenda of some sort, perhaps even a well-developed set of
beliefs about "Web architecture", "programming", or "information".
The fact that these agendas are here and that discussion takes place is
precisely what makes xml-dev worth reading. I've never met anyone I
thought genuinely capable of critical thinking about their own beliefs,
myself included. That kind of critical thinking can take place
profitably in public, performed by a group rather than just one person.
I certainly have my own set of agendas, and they don't always seem
coherent. I pour lots of effort into stopgap fixes for technology I'd
rather see torn down, promoting both the patching and the demolition of
technology simultaneously. To me, that seems okay.
I don't see why xml-dev should be expected to be a polite philosophical
tea party where agendas are prohibited and critical thinking is expected
to have taken place before the party. The chaos is good here, and maybe
we could even use some more divergent agendas to enrich the mix.
The person writing this was (I suspect) looking for rhetorical points
with which to dismiss a school of thought completely. Instead, they've
reminded me at least of how valuable contending agendas, public
discussion, and xml-dev in particular can be.
(Sorry for the meta-post.)
--
Simon St.Laurent
Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
Errors, errors, all fall down!
http://simonstl.com
|
