Re: Radiation as religion TRUE BELEIVERS AND PREACHING TO AND AT THE CHOIR

[Dave Derenzo <dave@UIC.EDU>]

I am not saying that one type of thinking is better than the other, they 

are just different.  Some people have a more highly developed left brain, 

others a more highly developed right brain.  The left brain is the seat of 

logic and the right brain is the seat of emotion and creativity.  Some 

people have managed to develop both sides equally, but that is the 

exception rather than the rule.  Logic and reason will never completely 

settle technical matters because people are involved, and not everyone 

believes in that approach.  Arguments like this will never be settled until 

we try to understand the other person's point of view and their frame 

reference.  Only after mutual understanding is reached can common ground be 

explored.  OK, I'm permanently off my soap box on this one.  Thanks for 

your consideration.



Dave





At 11:39 AM 6/11/03, you wrote:

>I do not favor the right brain - left brain analysis.  It is just a way for

>both groups to claim they are better than the other.  In science, all we

>have is rationality and technical analysis.  While some are more eloquent

>than others, to advocate emotional argument is a bad idea.  What has

>happened that is unforgivable is that the regulators now act on unfounded

>emotional arguments.  This era started with the profoundly stupid actions

>EPA took on DDT, but there are scores of other examples (like what has

>happened to nuclear power).

>

>----- Original Message -----

>From: "Dave Derenzo" <dave@UIC.EDU>

>To: <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>

>Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 11:25 AM

>Subject: RE: Radiation as religion TRUE BELEIVERS AND PREACHING TO AND AT

>THE CHOIR

>

>

> > I pretty much agree with Peter.  Some people like to push our collective

> > buttons to see how high they can make us jump.  The emotional world that

> > most anti-type people live in originates in the right side of the brain,

> > which technical people, who are predominantly left brained, have not

> > developed as well.  It is practically impossible to win a right brain

> > argument with a left brain answer, thus the eternal conflict.  If we want

> > to deal with this type of individual effectively, we need to stop using

> > technical arguments and address the emotional content of their

> > arguments.  We all could use a lesson from Peter Sandman, who specializes

> > in helping techies deal effectively with right brain thinkers.

> >

> > Dave Derenzo, RSO

> > University of Illinois at Chicago

> >

> > At 09:56 AM 6/11/03, Vernig, Peter G. wrote:

> > >Group,

> > >

> > >It never ceases to amaze me how long people will beat a dead horse.

> > >

> > >I would also like to see us limit ourselves to technical issues or at

>least

> > >limit the interminable debates to a small number of responses before

>people

> > >are obligated to take the discussion off the list.  But I suppose Mike

>would

> > >have to quit his job and spend all day monitoring the debates and sending

> > >out demands for people to take it off the list.

> > >

> > >Sometimes I think that it is a conspiracy by the anti nukes to waste the

> > >time of HPs, continually drawing them into endless debates and thereby

> > >distracting them from their work.

> > >

> > >That brings up a point that I continually wonder at as I delete without

> > >either opening or reading all the messages by certain individuals and all

> > >with a subject line reading "RE: Whatever the current debate topic is..."

> > >Where do some of you find the time to send 4, 6 or even 8 lengthy e-mail

> > >messages a day, complete with references?  Isn't there work you should be

> > >doing for your employer?

> > >

> > >Other times I think maybe we are the crafty ones engaging the anti-s in

> > >endless debate thereby distracting them from raising money and misleading

> > >the public.

> > >

> > >Most of the time however, I just equate the debaters with campaign

>workers

> > >who stand on street corners with signs touting their candidate or issue.

> > >Whoever saw a sign that said "Vote for Hickenlooper" and thus decided to

> > >vote for him?   [BTW I didn't make that name up, he is the new mayor of

> > >Denver]  I have always assumed that those people were well intentioned

>but

> > >not particularly adept at anything so the candidate or his or her

>campaign

> > >manager sent them out to be enthusiastic.

> > >

> > >My questions to people arguing both sides of these issues is, "Do you

>really

> > >think you are going to convince anybody on this forum?  You are preaching

>to

> > >the choir!"

> > >

> > >There are two reasons I do not quit Radsafe.  First is the ability as

> > >indicated above to easily dispense with all the messages that I know just

> > >waste bandwidth.  The Second is because I know from experience, that if I

> > >run across something way outside my experience in HP and need more

> > >information that there are people on this list who know ALL ABOUT IT and

> > >maybe even worked on the team that developed it.

> > >

> > >I guess then my advice to you Harry would be that unless we can convince

> > >Mike Stabin to change the rules of engagement which seems unlikely, or

>start

> > >a Technical Only clone of Radsafe is to do what I do.  Just ignore the

> > >continual babble of the true believers on both sides and delete all of

>that

> > >chatter.  It is a pity because I think what usually happens is that when

>a

> > >technical question is asked and answered any subsequent discussion after

>the

> > >first response and maybe even the first response is taken off the list so

>as

> > >not to bore people that are not interested in that particular issue.  I

> > >don't think that is necessary as, the members of Radsafe can easily

>delete

> > >technical issues that do not interest them as I do the debates.  It is a

> > >shame the debaters don't have a similar respect for the list.

> > >

> > >Usually when I am goaded to respond to a Radsafe message, I put it in a

> > >"Drafts" folder and as often as not never send it.  However I think I may

> > >just send it.  Harry struck a cord in his message and I have talked with

>a

> > >few Radsafe subscribers and heard a similar sentiment.

> > >

> > >Peter G. Vernig

> > >

> > >These opinions are completely my own and do not reflect those of the

>Denver

> > >VA Medical Center, the Dept. of Veterans Affairs, or the U.S. Government.

> > >

> > >"...whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is

> > >pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable, if anything is found to

>be

> > >excellent or praiseworthy, let your mind dwell on these things."  Paul of

> > >Tarsus

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >-----Original Message-----

> > >From: Anagnostopoulos, Harry W.

> > >[mailto:HAROLD.W.ANAGNOSTOPOULOS@saic.com]

> > >Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 7:30 AM

> > >To: 'NiagaraNet@aol.com'; radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

> > >Subject: RE: Radiation as religion too--overly zealous

> > >

> > >

> > >Folks, when are we going to learn from these examples?

> > >

> > >Here is a guy who masks his identity and intentions, raises issues to get

> > >some blood boiling, and then concludes with the message of "some people

>got

> > >mad at me, so the public should not trust any one of you". This last post

>is

> > >an adolescent version of a "nanny-nanny-boo-boo", and reveals the true

> > >intentions of the author all along.

> > >

> > >Is it any wonder that these type of threads end with so many "unsubsribe

> > >radsafe" messages? What can we learn from this exercise?

> > >

> > >I'd really like to see this forum limit itself to the sharing of

>technical

> > >information and keep opinions out as much as possible. Opinions are best

> > >taken to private e-mail, as I've seen in my past exchanges with similar

> > >"Lurkers".

> > >

> > >Obviously, this is an opinion, and mine only.

> > >

> > >-Harry

> > >

> > >-----------------------------------------------------------

> > >Harry Anagnostopoulos, CHP

> > >Senior Health Physicist

> > >SAIC

> > >9921 St. Charles Rock Rd.

> > >St. Ann, MO  36074

> > >(314) 429-9340  x22

> > >

> > >

> > >-----Original Message-----

> > >From: NiagaraNet@aol.com [mailto:NiagaraNet@aol.com]

> > >Sent: Wednesday, June 11, 2003 4:51 AM

> > >To: radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

> > >Cc: NiagaraNet@aol.com

> > >Subject: Radiation as religion too--overly zealous

> > >

> > >

> > >Dear Radsafers:

> > >

> > >An interesting concept--Environmentalism as Religion...

> > >

> > >I suppose this makes me Brother Lou, or perhaps Father Lou.

> > >If YOU would allow, I could be Pope and really Pius people off...

> > >But wait, that smoke from the Papal decision chimney will precipitate

>acid

> > >rain.

> > >

> > >I've heard many precepts here on this board and have been accused of

>much,

> > >but this takes the cake!    Talk about insight. Whew baby.

> > >

> > >For anyone who wants to take a legal "shot" at me, please feel free.

> > >I for one, will hire lawyers that are EIGHT FEET TALL and brush their

>teeth

> > >with Beryillium shavings from the floor. Bring it on baby.

> > >

> > >For those of you that have questioned my purpose on the RS board--rest

> > >assured, I have the information I need. I'm now LESS confident in the

>level

> > >of

> > >professionalism that one would expect from people who handle materials

> > >potentially

> > >deadly to mankind. "Oh heck, things aren't THAT harmful...."  I wish I

>could

> > >

> > >post all of my off line email from this group. Some of you would be

>shocked

> > >at

> > >what your own HP, PE, Ph.D. type people have said about some of this

>blather

> > >

> > >and certain individuals. Yes blather. I thank each and every one of those

> > >responsible for the lessons in BULLYING--As I have been accused of

>several

> > >Xs. Look

> > >at the last digest (entire thread) and see who has been impolite and

> > >unreasonable. I still love you all as any good Pope-type-guy sould. I

>just

> > >hope some

> > >of you are never standing in front of me on fire--"No thanks honey, I

>don't

> > >care for a beer right now."

> > >

> > >I am honored that this subject, myself and Niagara Falls, New York,

> > >environmental condition have been mentioned about 401 times by those more

> > >learned than

> > >myself :*).

> > >

> > >Zealots come in all colors, shapes, sizes and professions. Some are even

> > >driven to act by money.

> > >Is Tammy Faye lurking out there somewhere in Radsafe land too? If "my

>kind"

> > >represent religion, what do you suppose you represent? YIKES!

> > >

> > >I just absolutely LOVE this quote--

> > > >>"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of

> > > > > servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home

> > > > > from us in peace. We ask not your counsel or your arms. Crouch

> > > > > down and lick the hands of those who feed you. May your chains

> > > > > set lightly upon you. May posterity forget that ye were our

> > > > > countrymen." - Samuel Adams

> > >

> > >AND--

> > >"Forgive them father for they know not what they do." Jesus Christ of

> > >Nazareth

> > >

> > >Sincerely,

> > >Lou Ricciuti

> > >NiagaraNet@aol.com

> > >"Los Alamos ain't got nothin on us here in Niagara."

> > >--- --- --- --- --- --- ---

> > >Sing this as a Monastic chant over and over again until it is ingrained.

> > >"Spiritus sanctus omnibus--I can play dominos better than you can."

> > >--- --- --- --- --- --- ---

> > >************************************************************************

> > >You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

> > >send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text

>"unsubscribe

> > >radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject

>line.

> > >You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/

> > >************************************************************************

> > >You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

> > >send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text

>"unsubscribe

> > >radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject

>line.

> > >You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/

> > >************************************************************************

> > >You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

> > >send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text

>"unsubscribe

> > >radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject

>line.

> > >You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/

> >

> > ************************************************************************

> > You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

> > send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

> > radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.

> > You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/

> >



************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.

You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/