Countering Countdown

This was a bit of a difficult concept for me to get a handle on. I understand EXACTLY what he's saying. . . . Countering is NOT ripping another writer to shreds, nor their work. It's not SLANDER. Countering must be purposeful, and one must not be looking to start a fight. However, to me, countering appears to be another kind of forwarding. It's taking someone else's work, and adding to it in some form or fashion, even if you don't agree with the original text.

That seems to be the cornerstone of countering. . . . . Disagreement, or a differing opinion, on some level. You can't just say, "I'm right; You're wrong." You actually have to understand the other position, and have a valid REASON that you disagree. You must be able to state and maintain your position without it deteriorating into a petty squabbling fit. (Many of us did this with Hedge's. We didn't actually say WHY we disagreed with him; We simply tore him, and his ideas, to shreds.) That was NOT countering; that was a loathing of the very air Hedges breathes.

I still can't get past the idea of countering being some kind of forwarding. It is, at it's basest level, taking someone else's work, and adding to it. Harris seems to be restating his theory for forwarding, but in a different manner. He's added another criteria, which is that of needing to further it through disagreeing, somehow. So, perhaps it is a SUBSET of forwarding. . . . . I don't really know. Perhaps I'm countering Harris slightly by making that observation. ;-)

Countering is rampant in blogging, if one looks for the "Well, I agree with this piece, and this one, but not this one, and this is why. Consider this, instead."

And thus, my friends, ends my countering on countering.