| ashu |
Posted
on 13-Oct-00 03:06 PM
Hi everyone,
I thought that the Wall Street Journal -- that daily BUSINESS newspaper -- ko article
on Nepal's Safa Tempo industry was pretty straightforward and clear.
The article talked about this relatively
new industry's getting off the ground in Kathmandu. And it went on to write that the industry, though promising on environmental grounds, was/is fraught with problems of commercial viability.
That was fine and good.
Now, I am neither a Safa Tempo ko bhakta
nor am I a Wall Street Journal ko pujari.
And so, even as a criical reader on my own,
I had no problem with that article.
But.
After posting that article on this Web site, what I did have problems was with Biswo Poudel's continuously UNCONVINCING
criticisms of the article.
What made the matters worse was, as I wrote earlier, I, along with at least one "silent reader" called Sangita, also had serious problems with Biswo's, what I have come to see, as just bad/stupid use of 'big impressive words.'
(See examples about this at the very end, below!)
Anyway, adding to that was his irksome habit of blaming his readers for NOT understanding
his points. He would say things like, "oh, you have misunderstood me" or that "you got
things wrong" when, as fairly as I could see, the fault was with his and his alone what can only be called pompous style of writing.
And what finally pissed me off was the flourish with which he -- with no clear/convincing arguments -- appointed himself "a sceptic . . . who raises
questions . . . for the development of the intellect."
(Then again, the question remains: How seriously can you really take this guy who
takes PUBLIC pride in the fact that he "correctly predicted" Professor Amartya
Sen's winning the 1998 Nobel Economics
prize when many more knowledgeable people
(like his former students) know that Professor Sen had long been a serious Nobel contender at least since the 1970s
when Biswo Poudel was still a toddler
in Tandi, Chitawan!!]
I went to Harvard where Professor Sen
taught for many years. For better or worse, one thing I learnt there was to TOLERATE
(and not necessarily appreciate) really smart people's arrogance as long as that arrogance is/was backed up with solid knowledge and incredible competence. Solid knowledge
and incredible competence were the keys.
What I learnt NOT to tolerate (i.e. totally slam against the wall) is arrogance rested on palpable ignorance and just floated on hot air.
*****************
[Commecial Break I] :-)
*****************
That said, I am really happy to see that
article and discussions surrounding it
has generated this much interest here.
On the Web, there's nothing more heartening
than to see a Site like this alive and kicking with arguments, counter-arguments, thoughts, provocations and much else besides.
So, on that note, let's get great
discussions going here like this!!
***********************
Commercial Break II :-)
************************
Finally, here's my reponse to Georgia's
Mr. Adhikari's MAJOR point, while
welcoming him to this Web site.
No.
I do NOT -- let me repeat -- do NOT
think that Safa Tempos are absolute
solutions/panaceas to all of Kathmandu's air-pollution.
I have never said anything like that.
Please do NOT put words in my mouth.
But I do believe that, all things being equal, the Safa Tempo industry is a relatively more environment-friendly one
than that of diesel- or petrol-guzzling
Tempos.
That said, I am quite aware that the Safa Tempo industry is just that -- an industry that needs to be commercially viable FIRST.
I mean, if the industry cannot sustain
itself commercially, then, it will just
die out -- and that will be that.
So far, the industry has been going on -- in fits and starts -- since 1996. That's 4 long years already.
Now, against this backdrop, all that the
Wall Street Journal, being a business newsaper, did was report on the industry -- shedding light on its promises and the challenges.
That was all.
Nothing more. This was my point all along.
************
Another commercial break :-)
***********
Meantime, in response to Biswo's
unconvincing criticisms, people who are involved in or have critically observed
the Safa Tempo Industry in Kathmandu as engineers, as transport strategists, analysts, drivers, financiers and passengers say that: though they would certainly
welcome more efficient technology on all fronts, they find that:
a) Cable snarling has NOT been
a problem for them to lose sleep over.
b) Speed too has NOT been a problem for
them to lose sleep over.
c) The issue of overweight too has NOT been
a problem for them to lose sleep over.
d) Foreign interference because this
industry is, to paraphrase an earlier
posting, 'some silly foreign experiment carried out on innocent Nepalis' has NOT
been observed.
Biswo's criticisms have thus been answered quite satisfactorily by those working in
the field. Of course, this does not mean
all is well with Safa Tempos.
But Biswo, on his own in Auburn, Alabama, like an ostrich burying its head in the
sand, insisted that these are/were MAJOR. MAJOR problems anyway.
Of course, it was hard to take Biswo's intellectual credibility seriously on this issue when, on another issue, he made fun of Al Gore's work on the environment WITHOUT apparently having done any basic research
on Gore's work.
I mean, why should any reasonable person believe this guy who grandly calls himself
"a skeptic" when all that he seems to be,
is lazy, prejudiced and just opinionted?
Lazy, prejudiced and just opinionted -- not against Safa Tempo per se. But against the values of skeptical thinking which he says he holds in high esteem in the first place.
So, this is what this whole debate
was all about -- this was a debate
about the nature of a debate.
It's just that the SUBJECT happened
to be Safa Tempo.
So, the issue here is NOT that I am a
bhakta of Safa Tempo, or that I think
Safa Tempo is the best thing since
sliced bread.
What I was and am out to defend -- for
better or worse -- right from the
beginning is a mode of inquiry or a form
of debate where, when better ideas with sharper evidence come, you let go of
weaker ones SO THAT the process of
learning IDEAS from one another
continues!
This was what the debate was all about.
Of course, other readers may interpret this
differently, and that's that.
***********
Finally, for almost all of us Nepalis, English is our second ot third or even fourth language.
Given this, it would be much easier to be sympathetic to Biswo's English skills if
he had the humility/grace to say, "look, guys, if you are not understanding my points
as you say, then, let me rework/revise or clarify what I have been saying".
Such an attitude would have gone a long
way on anyone's part to exercise patience
to understand Biswo's points.
But no.
Readers were constantly blamed as though
it was their faults for not understanding Biswo's "Lance Morrow-type English"!!
What's more, Biswo seemed to thump himself
up as the next Lance Morrow!!
[Lance Morrow, by the way, always writes clearly and simply with humor, grace and humanity.]
My attiude was: Why should anyone tolerate such UNJUSTIFIABLE arrogance from someone who, to cite one telling example, doesn't even seem to know what "venial" means, yet goes ahead to use that word to argue for the conviction of "corrupt" Nepali politicians!!
[Aside: "Venial" politicians who need to be convicted!! What a stupid/illogical idea!
I must have "elided" some logic here!!]
But wait, here's another example:
In one posting, Biswo wrote, " castigation . . . [is] detrimental to the honing of [Biswo's] skills".
In simple English, this meant: criticisms
are bad for Biswo to sharpen his [intellectual] skills.
When I wondered how this was so, for criticisms help us learn, Biswo accused
me of misunderstanding his point.
And that finally led me to think that
this guy really doesn't know the words
he uses:
I mean, he doesn;t know
a) what "castigation" means, but uses it anway
Or.
b) what "detrimental" means but uses it anyway
Or
c) what "honing" means but uses it anyway.
If these verbal examples above make up
the kind of English Biswo Poudel STUBBORNLY defends in spite of thoughtful readers' sincere objections, then he's better off enrolling himself in an ESL writing class before he makes further fool of himself.
And, I write that with painful due considerations that like for the rest of Nepalis, English is not his first language.
If I sound like I'm giving him a hard time,
I am. I make no bones about that.
Like I wrote, no one should tolerate what
can only be peceived as arrogance that is. alas, backed up with palpable ignorance.
Enough said.
oohi
ashu
|
| Biswo |
Posted
on 13-Oct-00 04:11 PM
1.I didn't say the politicans are venial.I
said that for crime. Go and read again. You
have mistake understanding elide, now you
have mistake understanding the sentence
containing the word venial.
2.I didn't say the criticisms were
detrimental to my honing of skills. I said
the lack of such criticisms were detrimental
to my skills. Go and read the whole
sentence again.I said criticims like your
were rare , and that rarity was detrimental
for my honing of skills.
3.I knew sooner or later you are going to
say my "Auburn , Alabama" identity is
nothing. With all your simile of humility,
you are just a arrogant writer,who either
doesn't read others'article properly or
think yourself to be a great person.
4.Writing commercial styled comments make
you more dramatic, and it doesn't provide
any strength to your arguments.
Should I write any more? No.I am not the
one who writes"I know Lance Morrow
personally" type of sentences without any
sequence. I mentioned Morrow only once,
saying his nice articles also are larded with
so called difficult words.I didn't compare
myself to Morrow.
You know Morrow,so what? Your strength is
not on knowing him, but it is on getting
same degree of achievement. You know, that
you can write only this kind of sentences:
>>
Lance Morrow, by the way, always writes clearly and simply with humor, grace and humanity.
(You write with humanity, or humility?)
Now,don't brag about your English knowledge.
As for safa tempo and its environmental and
weight related cause, you are just talking
to those people "WHO ARE DOING THE BUSINESS".
a businessman rarely admits what is bad in his stuff.
Don't write what is bad about Auburn , AL. I
am proud of my school, and my department. I
may have better scores in standardized tests
for graduate school than you, or at least
same as much as yours, so I don't need to
go to any English class, unless you first go
there. Going to Harvard does't mean that you
are open minded and know everything.
Al Gore may be your ideal. I know of his
family shares in Occidental. I know of his
embellishments. What else I need to know?
Ralph Nader is better person for me, though
I don't care about US politics.
Hopefully, It should be enough for your
introspection.
|
