On discourse
Discourse is a natural extension of two logical minds of differing philosophies as they interact and strive to interject some cohesion. Successful discourse is constructed upon a good dose of healthy
respect for "opposing partner". Although it sounds oxymoron, I am choosing the term "opposing partner' deliberately to emphasize the fact that a discourse is not for a hot-headed philistine who can not bear the smell of opposition. "It is no time to discourse, so Chrish save me; the day is hot, and the weather, and the wars, and the king and the dukes: it is no time to discourse." (Shakespeare: King Henry V, Act III, Scene II).
I surf a lot of net. Being a member of a few deshi forums, I noticed a tremendous amount of knowledge and talent in flux. To me, some are lovable while some are odious. This is all right. But a discourse without a sense of commonsense is nonsense. A discourse has to undulate our mind like a gentle stroke of a finger-on-a-harp. A discourse that creates aversion is no discourse at all. It's okay to bite and scratch and draw blood as long as there is sense and sensibility!
One who writes, by definition is vocal, and intends to modulate the hearts and minds of those readers who make up the silent majority. A discourse that brings such aversion, to my mind, is not the right course of discourse.
A proposition, a concept or a statement that materializes no sensible consequence in the minds of involved, whatever vainglorious it may be, is of no meaning. A noun is nothing but a noun unless a verb is there to undulate it.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
Comments