Re: Potential Debate (Level Playing Field)

Hemant Desai (
Sat, 23 Mar 1996 09:40:33 -0600 (CST)


Please don't go back into lurk mode just yet. There remain
plenty of unanswered questions and therefore some more work needs
to be done here. Your post hits home on the issue of dealing with
different viewpoints. BTW, I received mail yesterday from a friend
who is on this list who seemed taken aback because of my "stand on
the other side" (as opposed to the silent majority and, I guess,
all those people who "have been good to us grad students").

I realize there are agendas at work in everything we do. I am
juggling, for instance, two roles here -- trying to be an active
participant as well as some sort of coordinator for this list.

I admit, like most other people, that I have motives. But my
roots are not in the spread of PCP per se or in finding students,
but in getting a degree that will, perhaps, level the playing field
for me somewhat in future endeavors. Thus, this list has helped me a
lot during that lengthy and inarticulate process of doctoral study.

BTW, do you think this list is a level playing field for a dissenting
voice who has a Ph.D. but is not a PRO-fessor at a major University?

Hemant Desai
> On: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 21:48:48 -0800 (PST)
> "F. Reid Creech" <> said:<snip>
> > However, I don't think that this system (the "good old boy"
> > network) can be proven, demonstrated, and perhaps, even be
> > challenged. I think that it is there and that it is real;
> > however, it is a byproduct of the way in which we conduct
> > business. <snip>
> I think the last phrase might be changed to:
> ... it is a byproduct of the way in which human beings regard
> themselves and those who differ from themselves.
> The dimension along which the difference is mapped may be skin
> colour, body shape, gender (and gender preference), or any other
> dimension which is regarded as having at least some minor
> significance.
> With respect to the suggestion of a moderated debate, in real
> "cyber" time, I strongly support the concept. However, somewhat
> selfishly, I hope that at least some of the "rules" of the debate
> would require the "contestants" to provide a general introductory
> background for their position. I am afraid that as a newcomer to
> the PCP/Kelly world I miss most, if not all, of the nuances of
> the more emotion laden interchanges. (I do get the strength of
> the emotions.)
> Maybe the list is in fact only for those whose knowledge is at a
> certain level. I hope however that at least some consideration
> can be given to the idea of doing some "teaching" in the course
> of the debating.
> Before I lapse back into lurk mode ... I would be interested in
> some anecdotes about how the PCP/Kelly approach has been useful
> in an applied fashion.
> Terry Semple.