Minutus

Me too! I think it's actually more homeopathic than pseudo- tho?

Fran wrote: "It is very homeopathic (and much more effective) to side with the argument the antagonistic person is making and use that energy to gain momentum for what you are trying to achieve. Very allopathic to only oppose."
In addition to its aesthetic appeal (much greater subtlety and finesse than flat-out opposing everything), it's also much more in accordance with basic communication and "argument" skills. "Communication" begins with "co"--"together". Good and effective communication can only happen on the basis of what each party has in *common* (that "co" again), and a more skillful communicator (such as Fran clearly is ) will identiy and draw upon just as much common ground as they can. Then you have less distance to travel in closing your "case", and have greater likelihood of the person actually *listening* to you, and hearing you, and viewing you as a person who "knows things" and whose viewpoint is worth considering.
Shannon

Hi, Shannon --

Yes, I think you're right about this. When I mentioned a threat to livelihoods, I was referring to the livelihoods of paid trolls (positions as which are advertised under such titles as "Social Marketer" for the advertising employment agency's "major pharmaceutical client").

This is distinct from my reference to medicine "based on a pharmaceutical industry profiting...", a portion of which profits go to "educating" practising physicians and propping up consistently biased research, highly selective publication, purchase of author names, and even the forgery of entire journal titles in order to maintain the illusion of evidence, the illusion of consensus, and the illusion of scientific scrutiny.

My speculation concerned whether the interesting notion that medicine could come to be practised on a basis of evidence could be embraced even by those paid to oppose all such notions: the full-time "social marketers" who flatter themselves as being skeptics.

Cheers --

John
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Where it is doing the right thing, a great power should be robust against embarrassment."
—Simon Jenkins, "U.S. embassy cables: The job of the media is not to protect the powerful from embarrassment", The Guardian 28 Nov 2010, .

PS--I don't know what the convention is; is it supposed to be only the offspring and spouse named, or should/could we put "Charley Custer (Liz), and Shannon Custer Nelson (Bob)"--I think I've seen something like that done?? Or whatever?

Shannon, I'm lost! What are you talking about?
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Where it is doing the right thing, a great power should be robust against embarrassment."
—Simon Jenkins, "U.S. embassy cables: The job of the media is not to protect the powerful from embarrassment", The Guardian 28 Nov 2010, .