Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site decwrl.DEC.COM Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!decwrl!larrabee From: larrabee@decwrl.DEC.COM (Tracy Larrabee) Newsgroups: net.singles Subject: Re: Tracy vs. Eric.(8-) Message-ID: <1988@decwrl.DEC.COM> Date: Mon, 31-Mar-86 00:35:55 EST Article-I.D.: decwrl.1988 Posted: Mon Mar 31 00:35:55 1986 Date-Received: Wed, 2-Apr-86 01:03:47 EST References: <499@cuuxb.UUCP> Reply-To: larrabee@decwrl.UUCP (Tracy Larrabee) Distribution: net Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation Lines: 74 Keywords: long and pointless, I admit When I first read Eric's response to my posting I was pretty surprised and somewhat defensive. I thought I was just responding to a topic of general interest on the net; one that had been started by a direct request for advice (this was also my second "subjective" posting ever). I was certainly not the first to offer any advice, and as far as I can tell my advice was limited to the suggestion that "we all be gentler with ourselves." (I guess I also suggested, via saying that those of us who sound wise on the net may not be authorities, that things read here might be taken with a grain of salt.) My urge to defend myself was strong, but then I thought about how just about anything said on this net seems to be taken as lighter fluid by someone. (Strange, but when I send out simple requests for straight-forward information I am usually greated with complete silence?!?!) So, until Tom reminded me that I felt as if I had been somewhat misinterpreted, I forgot about it. Things probably should have stayed that way, but now I can't resist. Here are a couple of short things I wanted to say: First, I was writing only my views about scientific and technical folk that have socialization problems. I am certainly one of the scientific folk, and I have at times been accused of being socially inept (as a female who entered Caltech at 16, I have certainly had my own problems). I don't usually feel inept now, but my sister still calls me "my egg-headed sister" (which I now see as an endearment). Most of the friends I have had in my life would probably be called "nerdly" by mainstream America. As friends will, we have spent quite a bit of time discussing any problems we have had or dissatisfactions we have had with ourselves. Over time I have developed a strong feeling that extreme self-criticism, as differentiated from a healthy desire to better one's self, is a strong contributer to being socially self-conscious. It's an opinion (just another one of those things that everybody's got...); not exactly a radical one or one that seems to be worthy of violent rebuttal, but *it* *is* *my* *opinion*. Eric writes: >This posting bothers me a good bit, I must admit, because it seems to be >the sort of thing that *causes* exactly what it is claiming to comment on. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Well, I read what followed, and I reread my entire posting, and I am still mystified. What can I say. I had no lofty intent: those were just some thoughts I had after reading the recent net news and the article I mentioned. Eric also writes: >If you take the above phrases out of the bulk of the posting, you find the ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ [Ahem] >claim that "a lot" of "high IQ" people are "social bumpkins" who actually >got into the sciences because they were "socially incompetent"; and that >in the end everyone's all exactly alike, because anybody who may appear to >be "wise" or "bright" actually may have inner dissatisfactions. This paragraph does not paraphrase what I was trying to say. If I was off the mark in tone...well, I try to write lucidly and evocatively, but I know that I often fail. I'm not looking for a shoot out. I have a feeling that Eric and I are probably both being protective of people (or ideas--pretty similar) we care about (each in his own way). Like I said earlier, I probably shouldn't even defend myself--I guess I just haven't been flamed enough yet. No doubt I will grow the requisite thick skin. One last thing. Tom writes: >Thanks for your indulgence. And thanks for your tolerance and open mind, Tom. -- Tracy@su-sushi decwrl!larrabee "If you can touch a clock and never start it, you can start a clock and never touch it. That's logic as I know it and use it." James Thurber (-The Thirteen Clocks-)