Open Letter to the Douchebags who Trundled a Giant Rock onto my Head (Guideline 1 is out the window)

Sam Lightner, Jr. wrote:Words don't lead to actions. Words MIGHT lead to actions. 9 times out of 10 words lead nowhere. Take, for example, words like Utopia, or peace. Or take most of what is said on this forum. I'm well travelled enough Ken to know that words might lead somewhere, but usually don't. They end up being what they really are... hot air blown from someones mouth.

I already gave you a link to a situation in which words "most definitely" caused a deadly reaction, and I can point out hundreds more. Saying that words "might" lead to an action only applies to something that hasn't happened yet. The Danish Embassy happened, as did the Holocaust. Hence, words "do" lead to actions. And please show me physical evidence that the percentage is nine times out of ten that words are innocuous. I'm guessing that you can't and that you pulled those numbers out of thin air.

The Rachael Ray/Dunkin Donuts debacle is yet another example of how mere words can provoke a dramatic action.

And one more. Why not? Not that prospective employers, clients, etc. don't consider resumes, background and such, but closing the deal quite often - I would guess most of the time - depends on what you say and how you say it during the interview. I don't know too many employers who would disagree. The final decisions are ultimately decided by the sales pitch (words).

Tony Bubb wrote: "Use Of Fighting Words" if I recall correctly is a low-level misdemeanor punishable by a maximum of $999 and 1 year in Jail, and only if the use of language is intended to provoke a violent or unruley response...

I wonder if I can get a homeowner to go into some sort of a rant for me climbing on public rocks; maybe we can be cell-mates; well, at least I'd get out a few months earlier. Stay tuned....

Ken Cangi wrote: I already gave you a link to a situation in which words "most definitely" caused a deadly reaction, and I can point out hundreds more. Saying that words "might" lead to an action only applies to something that hasn't happened yet. The Danish Embassy happened, as did the Holocaust. Hence, words "do" lead to actions. And please show me physical evidence that the percentage is nine times out of ten that words are innocuous. I'm guessing that you can't and that you pulled those numbers out of thin air. The Rachael Ray/Dunkin Donuts debacle is yet another example of how mere words can provoke a dramatic action.

Ken:

You are right. I suspect if Gandi gave a speech in 1937 Germany, its tenor would have been a bit different from Adolf's. Sure the historical situation allowed for such tripe to take hold, but 7 or 8 years of Nazi propaganda certainly inflamed the masses. Words do lead to action. Ever hear of the Klan? First a little cross burning, then we'll have a hanging. I remember as a kid seeing their disgusting parades and signs. Their message lead to the deaths of several civil rights workers. Nah, words mean nothing. That is plain BS.

William Dacier wrote: Ever hear of the Klan? First a little cross burning, then we'll have a hanging. I remember as a kid seeing their disgusting parades and signs.

And yet rather than allow them to sway you, you found them disgusting! Hmmm... You mean that the words only held sway with the people that already believed them, or wanted to?

-----------------------------------------------------------------

What if intent leads to both the words and actions. Observing a correlation and calling it a cause can be what is know as a "fundamental attribution error" in the world of psychological sciences.

That's like saying that swinging your fist causes you to punch someone. And while I promise that B never happens without A happening first, to say its the cause is just silly. WILLFUL INTENT TO ACT causes actions.

Or perhaps we all know that thoughts cause words, and words cause actions. Perhaps it's time for thought-crimes? Was Orwell 20 years early?

Tony Bubb wrote: And yet rather than allow them to sway you, you found them disgusting! Hmmm... You mean that the words only held sway with the people that already believed them, or wanted to?

You don't quite see the picture very clearly. I lived in a northern town in 1967 when racial tensions were very heightened. The Klan came to town and gave a speech along their typical lines of thought. Who reacted? Why the black community did. They burned down that building where the Klan held its meeting, plus ten or so other blocks of buildings. I couldn't really blame them although I didn't condone it. So, you see, you have words that caused actions by other than the intended recipient. The blacks weren't supposed to be swayed by the Klan, but they were. You need to get beyond your own little construct there.

William Dacier wrote: You don't quite see the picture very clearly. I lived in a northern town in 1967 when racial tensions were very heightened. The Klan came to town and gave a speech along their typical lines of thought. Who reacted? Why the black community did. They burned down that building where the Klan held its meeting, plus ten or so other blocks of buildings. I couldn't really blame them although I didn't condone it. So, you see, you have words that caused actions by other than the intended recipient. The blacks weren't supposed to be swayed by the Klan, but they were. You need to get beyond your own little construct there.

So you are saying that the blacks who burned down that building hitherto had no tension and were not in their capacity and free will? When ever I hear a "gee wizz, you shoulda known better..." response about minorities, I seem to see the most subtle, yet insideous form of racism.. the thought that they couldn't help but react.

Or are you saying that they made a decision?

Either way, you need to get a beyond your own little construct here.

Words themselves lead to the formation of intent to act.

It all starts with words. Then, when it's done. The words remain.

UNLESS: like somebody, I think Tony, said - people stop using the words. Yes, that is exactly it. That is what "political correctness" is all about. PC is a disparaging term applied to a perfectly rational attempt to stop the hatred for, the prejudice against, and the humiliation of other human beings. Strongly disparaging words shouldn't even be used for humor. They should just be eliminated from our language altogether (at least in that context). You can still say faggot if you are talking about a bundle of furze you intend to make a bon fire with to celebrate the harvest in 19th century Sussex, but you simply must never use the term to refer to a homosexual, or homosexual-like behavior today.

Not So Famous Old Dude wrote:Words themselves lead to the formation of intent to act. It all starts with words. Then, when it's done. The words remain. UNLESS: like somebody, I think Tony, said - people should stop using the words. Yes, that is exactly it. That is what "political correctness" is all about. PC is a disparaging term applied to a perfectly rational attempt to stop the hatred for, the prejudice against, and the humiliation of other human beings. Strongly disparaging words shouldn't even be used for humor.

No, I would have NEVER said anything of the sort.
So you are saying that words preceed the thoughts?
Or do thoughts preceed the words? Good god people...

THOUGHTS lead to words and acts, not words lead to thoughts and acts. The exception to this is odd mental illnessses. But unless we are talking about echolalia and echophraxia, you guys are nuts.

PS- Although I disagree with you, I will promise to never use the word fag if my gay friends will quit using it! Don't even get me started on language and some members of the black community!

Tony Bubb wrote: So words preceed the thoughts? Or do thoughts preceed the words. Good god people... Thoughts lead to words and acts, not words lead to thoughts and acts. The exception to this is odd mental illnessses. But unles we are talking about echolalia and echophraxia, you guys are nuts. PS- Although I disagree with you, I will promise to never use the word fag if my gay friends will quit using it! Don't even get me started on language and some members of the black community!

Yes, words precede thoughts. A baby is born. If nobody talks to him, he will be a complete vegetable. Words program him. That forms perceptions. That leads to action. Words always precede thoughts and thoughts precede actions.

I totally agree with your PS, though. But that just goes back to your original statement - if people know the words are wrong, then they should stop using them. It's not okay to say, "I'm black so I can use the word."

Tony Bubb wrote: So you are saying that the blacks who burned down that building hitherto had no tension and were not in their capacity and free will? When ever I hear a "gee wizz, you shoulda known better..." response about minorities, I seem to see the most subtle, yet insideous form of racism.. the thought that they couldn't help but react. Or are you saying that they made a decision? Either way, you need to get a beyond your own little construct here.

Never said any of that. Putting words in my mouth. Don't appreciate the hint at being racist either. So, Tony, just fuck off asshole.

Tony Bubb wrote: No, I would have NEVER said anything of the sort. So you are saying that words preceed the thoughts? Or do thoughts preceed the words? Good god people... THOUGHTS lead to words and acts, not words lead to thoughts and acts. The exception to this is odd mental illnessses. But unless we are talking about echolalia and echophraxia, you guys are nuts. PS- Although I disagree with you, I will promise to never use the word fag if my gay friends will quit using it! Don't even get me started on language and some members of the black community!

Tony,

It doesn't matter which precedes the other. What matters is that words can and do cause great harm to many. Consequently, it is essential that people adopt the habit of practicing care when choosing their words, if we want any real hope of effecting a positive change. Baby steps add up.

Whew, gettin' heated in here. So, three climbers walk into a bar...

I'll post the punchline when I think of it.

Ken Cangi wrote: Tony, It doesn't matter which precedes the other. What matters is that words can and do cause great harm to many. Consequently, it is essential that people adopt the habit of practicing care when choosing their words, if we want any real hope of effecting a positive change. Baby steps add up.

I can't read what's in a person's mind, but when they speak, I then have a pretty good idea. Words do matter as they are merely a manifestation of the thought behind the language expressed. Tony, even you can see that.

I can't resist observing this is a nice illustration of words that are less consequential than deeds...or we'd be calling the police, maybe an ambulance, and William might have to register as a sex offender!

Shawn Mitchell wrote:I can't resist observing this is a nice illustration of words that are less consequential than deeds...or we'd be calling the police, maybe an ambulance, and William might have to register as a sex offender!

Shawn, that's just too funny. Appreciate the levity! HA HA! Where's my ankle monitor?

Frankly I think we all need to step back and find a way to arrest sport climbers for thinking that trad climbs.....

Not that I'd necessarily bet against Tony in a scrap. But if words are the ultimate reality, well, I guess we already know how it turns out.

Mark Nelson wrote:Frankly I think we all need to step back and find a way to arrest sport climbers for thinking that trad climbs.....

?? I can't complete the thought. Mark, maybe it's an RFP, inviting suggestions for all grounds to arrest sport climbers? Shoot, let me count the ways.

Say, I think that's one posting just below me now. Grab him!
(Yes, the apparently psychic last line of the post brought to you by the miracle of retro-editing.)

Bob D'Antonio wrote:I think you all are a bunch of metrosexual's for for wasting so much time on this. :) Ken...do you share your hair and facial products with both sexes?? :)

Coming from a guy who always has to hug me when he sees me, I wouldn't talk if I were you. Love ya, man.

To answer your product question, WHAT HAIR?

Shawn Mitchell wrote: ?? I can't complete the thought. Mark, maybe it's an RFP, inviting suggestions for all grounds to arrest sport climbers?

I can only offer direction; I'll leave the remainder to you lawmakers.

Just remember you won't see me sport climbing, it's actually protected slab climbing, I just need closer pro-spacing than most other trad climbers.