![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Aug. 12th, 2009 12:24 amThanks to vito_excalibur I know that David Levine has thought more about RaceFail09 and come to different conclusions.
First, and most important: Taking seriously the possibility that you might be wrong is praiseworthy, and I praise it.
Also, I agree with David Levine that human communication can only be understood in context. I said earlier that PNH's participation in RaceFail09 was like a guy who walked into a room of people who burst out laughing at him because they had been talking about Repo Man and he was carrying a plate of shrimp.
And I contend that this viewpoint-neutral way of talking about communication in context is true. But it isn't complete.
Most people don't get to assume that their context is the context. If you do (and anytime you argue that what you meant is what matters, you do), then your privilege is showing. And you should pull your pants up. Nobody wants to have to look at that.
First, and most important: Taking seriously the possibility that you might be wrong is praiseworthy, and I praise it.
Also, I agree with David Levine that human communication can only be understood in context. I said earlier that PNH's participation in RaceFail09 was like a guy who walked into a room of people who burst out laughing at him because they had been talking about Repo Man and he was carrying a plate of shrimp.
And I contend that this viewpoint-neutral way of talking about communication in context is true. But it isn't complete.
Most people don't get to assume that their context is the context. If you do (and anytime you argue that what you meant is what matters, you do), then your privilege is showing. And you should pull your pants up. Nobody wants to have to look at that.