A scientist speaks

outsider wrote:
First of all I really wish some of the people who post here would calm
the hell down. I know we are in stressful times but a number of you,
honestly, seem like your near the deep end of the pool (without
flippers).


Now as for that really odd assertion that a scientist being more logical
would therefore be less emotional let me say I have heard some pretty
nutty things and this is up there.


The ability to reason while under strong emotion is not the same as no
emotion. I am a scientist and am one of the most emotional people I know
but reason and experience has taught me over decades that acting
precipitously does not gain good results no matter how strongly I feel
about something. In fact the stronger I feel the more I want good
results so I channel my emotion into logic and reason. I can't imagine
anyone who posts to this group being non-emotional. I find someone
grading ones level of caring as an inverse to how well one can think
pretty pathetic and maybe a bit transparent.


I honestly do not want to hear: that is not what I said/meant and I sure
don't want to read that is not what the op said/meant. The rancor is
getting tiresome. I know I am not the only one thinking this put I am
probably the least "popular" one thinking it and that means I have the
least to lose by offending and so I speak.

Think before you act/speak. It is a lot easier than taking it back
later.

sheesh!


Very well said. Thanks,

--Another scientist/engineer

outsider wrote:

wrote in news:49fa2259$0$1666

outsider wrote:

I can't imagine
anyone who posts to this group being non-emotional. I find someone
grading ones level of caring as an inverse to how well one can think
pretty pathetic and maybe a bit transparent.

This is an interesting comment, Andy. What do you mean by
"transparent"? What are you seeing through the tranparency? Do
you mean that people feel threatened by someone who is smarter
than they are, so they have to put them down by calling them uncaring?

No, but I wonder if there is a cloacked agenda in that comment.

Cloaked agenda? Do you mean on my part? If so, no - not at all. I just
couldn't think of anything else you might have meant by "transparent".
That usually means "I can see right through you, to your real
motivations", and I don't know what other motivation someone would
have to put another person down for being more logical, unless it was
that they feel inferior because they are less logical. That doesn't
mean there are no other reasons, but that's why I was asking you.

So, tell me, what *did* you mean by transparent?

I agree, by the way, that just because a person is logical that does
not mean they're not emotional! I'm a pretty logical person myself most
of the time, although I don't consider myself to be a scientist. I do
work in a logic-oriented field (I used to write software, now I write
software manuals). But I'm also a very emotional person and I consistently
score "F" on all the MBTI tests.

( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers-B...Type_Indicator )

--
Joyce ^..^

To email me, remove the XXX from my user name.

wrote:
outsider wrote:

wrote in news:49fa2259$0$1666

outsider wrote:

I can't imagine
anyone who posts to this group being non-emotional. I find someone
grading ones level of caring as an inverse to how well one can think
pretty pathetic and maybe a bit transparent.

This is an interesting comment, Andy. What do you mean by
"transparent"? What are you seeing through the tranparency? Do
you mean that people feel threatened by someone who is smarter
than they are, so they have to put them down by calling them uncaring?

No, but I wonder if there is a cloacked agenda in that comment.

Cloaked agenda? Do you mean on my part? If so, no - not at all. I just
couldn't think of anything else you might have meant by "transparent".
That usually means "I can see right through you, to your real
motivations", and I don't know what other motivation someone would
have to put another person down for being more logical, unless it was
that they feel inferior because they are less logical. That doesn't
mean there are no other reasons, but that's why I was asking you.

So, tell me, what *did* you mean by transparent?

I agree, by the way, that just because a person is logical that does
not mean they're not emotional! I'm a pretty logical person myself most
of the time, although I don't consider myself to be a scientist. I do
work in a logic-oriented field (I used to write software, now I write
software manuals). But I'm also a very emotional person and I consistently
score "F" on all the MBTI tests.

( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers-B...Type_Indicator )

I test out as an "F" too, ISFJ if I remember correctly.

--Kim

MLB wrote:
Matthew wrote:
"Cheryl" wrote in message
...
"Matthew" wrote in message
ng.com...

I am a firm believer in Words have no meaning with out the voice
behind them
So is that *all* of Usenet?

Scary thought YES ;-)

Matthew, please rethink that statement. There is "the good book" ,
lots of good books, and there is radio and television.

What good book is that then? ;-)
--
Adrian (Owned by Snoopy, Bagheera & Shadow)
Cats leave pawprints on your heart
http://community.webshots.com/user/clowderuk

"outsider" wrote in message
...
"CatEyes" wrote in
:

"outsider" wrote in message
...

First of all I really wish some of the people who post here would
calm the hell down. I know we are in stressful times but a number of
you, honestly, seem like your near the deep end of the pool (without
flippers).


Now as for that really odd assertion that a scientist being more
logical would therefore be less emotional let me say I have heard
some pretty nutty things and this is up there.


The ability to reason while under strong emotion is not the same as
no emotion. I am a scientist and am one of the most emotional people
I know but reason and experience has taught me over decades that
acting precipitously does not gain good results no matter how
strongly I feel about something. In fact the stronger I feel the
more I want good results so I channel my emotion into logic and
reason. I can't imagine anyone who posts to this group being
non-emotional. I find someone grading ones level of caring as an
inverse to how well one can think pretty pathetic and maybe a bit
transparent.


I honestly do not want to hear: that is not what I said/meant and I
sure don't want to read that is not what the op said/meant. The
rancor is getting tiresome. I know I am not the only one thinking
this put I am probably the least "popular" one thinking it and that
means I have the least to lose by offending and so I speak.

Think before you act/speak. It is a lot easier than taking it back
later.

sheesh!

And what a fine example of that you've given us here! ;

Hugs,

CatNipped





And here we have the completely useless snide comment. Instead of
disagreeing and explaining why we have this.

There you have me pointing out the hypocrisy of your using baiting language
like "seem like your [sic] near the deep end of the pool (without
flippers)", and "I find someone grading ones level of caring as an inverse
to how well one can think pretty pathetic and maybe a bit transparent,"
while all the while professing that you are "scientific" and would not
act/speak without thinking. Sayings like "Let he who has not sinned cast
the first stone" or that thing about glass houses come to mind.

If you find it to be satisfyingly self-aggrandizing to come on to the group
and chastise what people do here, well more power to you. But don't expect
me to not point out the fact that you are doing the very same thing you
spurn them for doing.

"God is an iron." ~ Spider Robinson

Hugs,

CatNipped

After reading all those pages, I decided I didn't want to know the answer.
I am a product of my life and don't really want to have another LABEL
attached, thank you very much.
"Lucys Mom" wrote in message
...
wrote:
outsider wrote:

wrote in news:49fa2259$0$1666

outsider wrote:

I can't imagine anyone who posts to this group being
non-emotional. I find someone grading ones level of caring as an
inverse to how well one can think pretty pathetic and maybe a bit
transparent.

This is an interesting comment, Andy. What do you mean by
"transparent"? What are you seeing through the tranparency? Do
you mean that people feel threatened by someone who is smarter
than they are, so they have to put them down by calling them
uncaring?

No, but I wonder if there is a cloacked agenda in that comment.

Cloaked agenda? Do you mean on my part? If so, no - not at all. I just
couldn't think of anything else you might have meant by "transparent".
That usually means "I can see right through you, to your real
motivations", and I don't know what other motivation someone would
have to put another person down for being more logical, unless it was
that they feel inferior because they are less logical. That doesn't
mean there are no other reasons, but that's why I was asking you.

So, tell me, what *did* you mean by transparent?

I agree, by the way, that just because a person is logical that does
not mean they're not emotional! I'm a pretty logical person myself most
of the time, although I don't consider myself to be a scientist. I do
work in a logic-oriented field (I used to write software, now I write
software manuals). But I'm also a very emotional person and I
consistently
score "F" on all the MBTI tests.

( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers-B...Type_Indicator )

I test out as an "F" too, ISFJ if I remember correctly.

--Kim

Adrian wrote:
MLB wrote:
Matthew wrote:
"Cheryl" wrote in message
...
"Matthew" wrote in message
ng.com...

I am a firm believer in Words have no meaning with out the voice
behind them
So is that *all* of Usenet?

Scary thought YES ;-)

Matthew, please rethink that statement. There is "the good book" ,
lots of good books, and there is radio and television.

What good book is that then? ;-)



The dictionary -- what were you thinking?

"CatEyes" wrote in
:

"outsider" wrote in message
...
"CatEyes" wrote in
:

"outsider" wrote in message
...

First of all I really wish some of the people who post here would
calm the hell down. I know we are in stressful times but a number
of you, honestly, seem like your near the deep end of the pool
(without flippers).


Now as for that really odd assertion that a scientist being more
logical would therefore be less emotional let me say I have heard
some pretty nutty things and this is up there.


The ability to reason while under strong emotion is not the same as
no emotion. I am a scientist and am one of the most emotional
people I know but reason and experience has taught me over decades
that acting precipitously does not gain good results no matter how
strongly I feel about something. In fact the stronger I feel the
more I want good results so I channel my emotion into logic and
reason. I can't imagine anyone who posts to this group being
non-emotional. I find someone grading ones level of caring as an
inverse to how well one can think pretty pathetic and maybe a bit
transparent.


I honestly do not want to hear: that is not what I said/meant and
I sure don't want to read that is not what the op said/meant. The
rancor is getting tiresome. I know I am not the only one thinking
this put I am probably the least "popular" one thinking it and that
means I have the least to lose by offending and so I speak.

Think before you act/speak. It is a lot easier than taking it back
later.

sheesh!

And what a fine example of that you've given us here! ;

Hugs,

CatNipped





And here we have the completely useless snide comment. Instead of
disagreeing and explaining why we have this.

There you have me pointing out the hypocrisy of your using baiting
language like "seem like your [sic] near the deep end of the pool
(without flippers)", and "I find someone grading ones level of caring
as an inverse to how well one can think pretty pathetic and maybe a
bit transparent," while all the while professing that you are
"scientific" and would not act/speak without thinking. Sayings like
"Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone" or that thing about
glass houses come to mind.

If you find it to be satisfyingly self-aggrandizing to come on to the
group and chastise what people do here, well more power to you. But
don't expect me to not point out the fact that you are doing the very
same thing you spurn them for doing.

"God is an iron." ~ Spider Robinson

Hugs,

CatNipped






Well, if you honestly think that telling people they are acting like nut-
jobs is the same as mounting a vile attack against a young man who just
lost his young wife

and

you think that telling people they are acting like nut-jobs is the same
as emailing a vet and making all sort of accusations without any real
information

You are certainly welcome to your opinion.

wrote in
:

outsider wrote:

wrote in news:49fa2259$0$1666

outsider wrote:

I can't imagine
anyone who posts to this group being non-emotional. I find
someone grading ones level of caring as an inverse to how well one
can think pretty pathetic and maybe a bit transparent.

This is an interesting comment, Andy. What do you mean by
"transparent"? What are you seeing through the tranparency? Do
you mean that people feel threatened by someone who is smarter
than they are, so they have to put them down by calling them
uncaring?

No, but I wonder if there is a cloacked agenda in that comment.

Cloaked agenda? Do you mean on my part?


No. This was about the person who made the comment about science people
and it was just a suspicion, that is all. I could be easily wrong.


So, tell me, what *did* you mean by transparent?


I wondered if a hidden meaning was not even meant to be totally hidden.

MLB wrote in :

Adrian wrote:
MLB wrote:
Matthew wrote:
"Cheryl" wrote in message
...
"Matthew" wrote in message
ng.com...

I am a firm believer in Words have no meaning with out the voice
behind them
So is that *all* of Usenet?

Scary thought YES ;-)

Matthew, please rethink that statement. There is "the good book" ,
lots of good books, and there is radio and television.

What good book is that then? ;-)



The dictionary -- what were you thinking?




I am still stuck on radio and TV. I hear voices on _those_. And no, NOT
when they are turned off.