Clarity and Precision cutting past the Mist and Fog
Dear Michael,
It is good to connect with you via this forum. I look forward to meeting you in person and crossing hands with you one day.
First of all, thank you for your participation in this thread. I appreciate your comments.
I am going to respond to this post of yours as a way of revealing to everyone what is actually going on.
It is vital that we all maintain clarity on this forum. Please consider who is the one who instigated the "recent clashes" on the Shen Men Tao thread.
Let us also acknowledge that Sifu Stier is skillful at employing the guerilla tactic of creating havoc and then waiting for others to intervene and clean up the mess.
Again, please be careful with this. Sifu Stier's post in the Shen Men Tao thread is a prime example of "provocative" wording. This post is what has instigated the "clash". Here it is for your perusal below:
There is nothing neutral about this post. Neither is it respectful nor polite. I doubt that any child would be permitted by any adult to address another person in this manner.
Actually, I think that Kevin has exercised remarkable clarity in being able to see past Sifu Stier's effective "mist and fog" technique. I would like to commend Kevin on his ability to see past the fog and on having the courage to stand up and say what he thinks.
Now, let us move on to this excellent definition you have given of a certain "phenomenon", Michael.
This is a fascinating subject indeed. Let us be vigilant that in the very act of expressing this point of view we don't inadvertently point fingers at someone and make him out to be the "lone dissenter".
More specifically, in this case, let us be careful that we don't accidentally join Sifu Stier's "go team" and make Kevin the "lone dissenter".
Let us also remember that Sifu Stier claims to have many allies from whom he has received multitudes of supportive emails. Please see this quote:
Certainly, Sifu Stier, being a grandmaster, is well able to take care of himself and protect his space. Surely, it is Kevin we must pay respect to for his courageous stance.
Surely, it is also Sifu Santer and Joko who have the right to insist on a clear, distinct apology from Sifu Stier for saying such words as:
These are not the sorts of words that would even be permissible in grade school. I am genuinely surprised that anyone would criticise Sifu Santer and Kevin for expressing their opinions and asking for Sifu Stier to take proper responsibility for his words.
Here is exactly what Sifu Stier said about Sifu Santer:
Instead of apologising for his rude and insulting words and manner, Sifu Stier continues to assert that Sifu Santer had ill intent.
This is unacceptable.
I would like to give a simple example of how unacceptable this is:
Let us say that a person by the name of Duncan invites me and another of his friends, Jeremy, over as guests to his home for tea. If I were to proceed to insult Duncan's family and friends by telling them they were "kissing" each other's "arses" and then imply that they could only participate in the discussion if I deemed that they had something of value to contribute to my topic, wouldn't it be only right for Duncan to insist on a proper apology from me?
Furthermore, if I said that I had nothing but the highest respect for Duncan and his family, but that his child was trying to distract me from my conversation, and that he therefore deserved to be called an "arse kisser" and a "hijacker", would Duncan then not be even further insulted?
If at that time Duncan's other guest, Jeremy, were to stand up and express his opinion that I were rude and should apologise, wouldn't it be true that he were acting appropriately?
In this case, Jeremy represents Kevin, Duncan represents Sifu Santer, and I represent Sifu Stier.
Asserting one's right to receive an apology is a basic mode of conduct that children are taught in kindergarten. Moreover, at the grandmaster's level, claiming that one did not "intend" for his/her words to be taken the wrong way is not an acceptable way of resolving the issue (chaos self-created by the grandmaster). A grandmaster would either have no problems matching his/her intent with skillful action - and therefore avoid creating confusion and disharmony, or, if he/she were to accidentally act in such as way as to mislead someone about his/her intentions, the grandmaster would not hesitate to take responsibility and admit this error. Such is the way of a warrior who is not too proud and has nothing to hide.
Of course, one must not rule out the possibility that it could have been the secret intention of the grandmaster to create disharmony and dissention, in which case, this would be a case of ill intent on the part of Sifu Stier, not of Sifu Santer.
However, because Sifu Stier is a guest on this forum, and because one of our basic tenets is being courteous and polite, we at Shaolin Wahnam are graciously offering Sifu Stier an opportunity to make amends for his intended/unintended insults.
A simple, straight apology from Sifu Stier to Sifu Santer is in order.
Michael, once again, I would like to acknowledge your timely post. It has benefitted me in being able to cut past and reveal the inner workings of the illusion created by Sifu Stier on the "Shaolin Wahnam Institute Discussion Forum > Kungfu > Shen Men Tao" thread.
Best wishes,
Emiko
Dear Michael,
It is good to connect with you via this forum. I look forward to meeting you in person and crossing hands with you one day.
First of all, thank you for your participation in this thread. I appreciate your comments.
I am going to respond to this post of yours as a way of revealing to everyone what is actually going on.
Originally posted by Michael Udel
Let us also acknowledge that Sifu Stier is skillful at employing the guerilla tactic of creating havoc and then waiting for others to intervene and clean up the mess.
Originally posted by Michael Udel
Originally posted by Sifu Stier
There is nothing neutral about this post. Neither is it respectful nor polite. I doubt that any child would be permitted by any adult to address another person in this manner.
Originally posted by Michael Udel
Now, let us move on to this excellent definition you have given of a certain "phenomenon", Michael.
Originally posted by Michael
More specifically, in this case, let us be careful that we don't accidentally join Sifu Stier's "go team" and make Kevin the "lone dissenter".
Let us also remember that Sifu Stier claims to have many allies from whom he has received multitudes of supportive emails. Please see this quote:
Originally posted by sifu stier
Surely, it is also Sifu Santer and Joko who have the right to insist on a clear, distinct apology from Sifu Stier for saying such words as:
Originally posted by sifu stier
Here is exactly what Sifu Stier said about Sifu Santer:
Originally posted by sifu stier
This is unacceptable.
I would like to give a simple example of how unacceptable this is:
Let us say that a person by the name of Duncan invites me and another of his friends, Jeremy, over as guests to his home for tea. If I were to proceed to insult Duncan's family and friends by telling them they were "kissing" each other's "arses" and then imply that they could only participate in the discussion if I deemed that they had something of value to contribute to my topic, wouldn't it be only right for Duncan to insist on a proper apology from me?
Furthermore, if I said that I had nothing but the highest respect for Duncan and his family, but that his child was trying to distract me from my conversation, and that he therefore deserved to be called an "arse kisser" and a "hijacker", would Duncan then not be even further insulted?
If at that time Duncan's other guest, Jeremy, were to stand up and express his opinion that I were rude and should apologise, wouldn't it be true that he were acting appropriately?
In this case, Jeremy represents Kevin, Duncan represents Sifu Santer, and I represent Sifu Stier.
Asserting one's right to receive an apology is a basic mode of conduct that children are taught in kindergarten. Moreover, at the grandmaster's level, claiming that one did not "intend" for his/her words to be taken the wrong way is not an acceptable way of resolving the issue (chaos self-created by the grandmaster). A grandmaster would either have no problems matching his/her intent with skillful action - and therefore avoid creating confusion and disharmony, or, if he/she were to accidentally act in such as way as to mislead someone about his/her intentions, the grandmaster would not hesitate to take responsibility and admit this error. Such is the way of a warrior who is not too proud and has nothing to hide.
Of course, one must not rule out the possibility that it could have been the secret intention of the grandmaster to create disharmony and dissention, in which case, this would be a case of ill intent on the part of Sifu Stier, not of Sifu Santer.
However, because Sifu Stier is a guest on this forum, and because one of our basic tenets is being courteous and polite, we at Shaolin Wahnam are graciously offering Sifu Stier an opportunity to make amends for his intended/unintended insults.
A simple, straight apology from Sifu Stier to Sifu Santer is in order.
Michael, once again, I would like to acknowledge your timely post. It has benefitted me in being able to cut past and reveal the inner workings of the illusion created by Sifu Stier on the "Shaolin Wahnam Institute Discussion Forum > Kungfu > Shen Men Tao" thread.
Best wishes,
Emiko
Comment