BPARCELL'SRULESUBOY said:
[
And I also have not been here long enough for you to know me, your words are not needed here and no one is attacking anyone so you can save your apologetic. There is no such thing as an "objective" perspective, we are all subjects and view things subjectively. I am sure there are points where ALL posters agree and disagree, none being more valid than the other. Many posters read sound arguments and still cannot leave their presuppositions and propositions behind. Anyone can have a sound and properly reasoned argument that is valid but that is based on a proposition that is not true but false.
My words are not needed here? Speak for yourself; Hostile didn't take it that you were doing anything but attacking him so wake up. And the last time I checked this is a public forum and most of us are friend. If I sense that you are misunderstanding the intentions of someone here, then I have every right to state that. I wasn't saying you were wrong; I was just asking you to give Hostile the benefit of the doubt. The only thing that isn't needed is your hostility.
First of all, you do not know me, nor ALL of my views on Parcells and the team. You have no reasonable basis whatsoever in this context to argue that I am a "homer" which by the way is a childish name calling approach that you should know better, and that I somehow think Parcells can do no wrong. Think this through, how simplistic is your logic and argument.
WRONG, I never claimed to know you. However, I did state that I have yet to read one of your posts which criticizes any aspect of Parcells.
For example, you base this argument on very little knowledge of my perspectives, the possibilities that could be understood otherwise and you fall into a either/or argument based on a lack of information and sound logic.
Wrong again, this is just your assumption of what I said.
You wrongly presuppose that I am one of those "people" that apparently frustrate you because of their views on Parcells and corresponding approach.
0-3...You don't even know my views on Parcells for one thing. And you are doing the same thing to me what you have accused me of doing.
You assume you are "objective" if you view Parcells through a critical only perspective but others are somehow not "objective" if they accuse those who are uncritical and overstating the Parcells "blame" game perspective as being reactionary to the extent they are being illogical. No position is "objective" we are subjects hence our perspectives are subjective.
That is not true at all. We all have certain instincts and gut feelings/opinions on issues but most of us try to see the other side as well. I like Parcells. I was one of the guys who wanted him here when Campo was coach. However, I can step outside my fondness for him as a fan and be objective and grade the job he did the past season.
See this is the problem here, ultimately because you have assumed things about me, because I have not agreed with the company line, I am the "non-objective" Parcells can do no wrong guy that cannot possibly be correct.
What is the "company line'? HINT: There isn't one here. This is forum which offers a variety of opinions.
This is your critical mistake, you should never ctriticize me, call me names and then whine because I challenged your argument or a posters perspective you side with accordingly. This exposes gross bias and an unwillingness to dialogue and exchange with those who disagree genuinely from your perspective especially if the challenge your logic or call it wrong. This is not a pride contest, leave that stuff at home.
How did I criticize you? If I did I apologize. This is the second time I have apologized. Apparently you missed it the first time I wrote that in my thread.
