Re^11: Jokes, ad-hominem attacks, and sensitivity-- Now definitely OT

What you are saying is, that although you may not understand how you've caused offense, it's permissible to be sorry that you have caused offense. Ie. You're sorry that the other party is offended.

Now re-read 569383.

There is also the situation where even when the cause of offense is explained, it is impossible for you to understand why the other party is offended. In these circumstances, it's possible to feel sorry that the person is offended, without feeling the desire to apologise for the words/actions/non-actions to which the attribute the offense.

Example: I don't like rap music. To my ears, most of it does not fit my definition of music. That statement may offend many millions of rappers and rap fans. I'm sorry that my opinion causes them offense, but it doesn't change how I feel about the genre.

Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.

Lingua non convalesco, consenesco et abolesco. -- Rule 1 has a caveat! -- Who broke the cabal?

"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".

In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.

Comment on Re^11: Jokes, ad-hominem attacks, and sensitivity-- Now definitely OT

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^12: Jokes, ad-hominem attacks, and sensitivity-- Now definitely OT by Argel (Prior) on Aug 27, 2006 at 07:28 UTC
If you do not feel sorry that you hurt someone's feelings then any apology is a hollow one. If you actually care about the other person's feelings then it isn't. I don't need to understand why someone likes or does not like rap music. I just need to know that they like it or do not like it so that I can avoid or raise the topic as appropriate.	[reply]