The Economics of Cochlear Implants and Deafness?

Why? I simply asked that flip stop saying incorrect things about me. That is not a can of worms. I guess I should have made my previous comment more specific.
 
owen06 said:
Why? I simply asked that flip stop saying incorrect things about me. That is not a can of worms. I guess I should have made my previous comment more specific.
Click to expand...

Gee....I don't know. Perhaps it was the phrase "blatantly lying" in reference to voicing an opinion.
 
Saying that I am on here to prove a person wrong, when I have never, ever said that, is not an opinion, it was a statement. It was an attempt at circumventing my requests for the information. Even when I've added the information I've said that I'm not trying to discount the studies. That is not trying to prove people wrong so yes, it is a blatant lie and it is offensive.
 
owen06 said:
Saying that I am on here to prove a person wrong, when I have never, ever said that, is not an opinion, it was a statement. It was an attempt at circumventing my requests for the information. Even when I've added the information I've said that I'm not trying to discount the studies. That is not trying to prove people wrong so yes, it is a blatant lie and it is offensive.
Click to expand...

It is a statement based on opinion. Perhaps you should look at the ways in which you are giving others an incorrect perception of your intent. I always find it odd that the hearing are quick to point out the perceived offensiveness of the deaf without ever taking into consideration their own offensive remarks.
 
Nucleus Freedom is Designed to Mimic the path of Natural Hearing
One of the most incredible things about hearing is the way our brains learn to identify important sounds, while filtering out background sounds. Nucleus® Freedom™ is designed to mimic the functions of the human ear, by automatically distinguishing important sounds from everything else—just like natural hearing.

I personally find such innaccuracies as the bolded statement above, taken fromt he Nucleus Freedom website, to be offensive.
 
If it is based on an opinion then it should be qualified as such, it was not. Still offensive. I don't know how I give others an incorrect perception of my intent when I am quite open with it:

I am in favor at looking at all sides of an issue.
Click to expand...

With regards to looking at all sides of an issue I think it's pertinant to look at all the research, limitations included. Looking at all sides is not offensive.
 
jillio said:
Nucleus Freedom is Designed to Mimic the path of Natural Hearing
One of the most incredible things about hearing is the way our brains learn to identify important sounds, while filtering out background sounds. Nucleus® Freedom™ is designed to mimic the functions of the human ear, by automatically distinguishing important sounds from everything else—just like natural hearing.

I personally find such innaccuracies as the bolded statement above, taken fromt he Nucleus Freedom website, to be offensive.
Click to expand...


I am sorry that you find that offensive, as it is misleading as well. Unfortunatly I am not a web diesigner and cannot change that. It is also statements like that that makes me look at other research as well.
 
owen06 said:
If it is based on an opinion then it should be qualified as such, it was not. Still offensive. I don't know how I give others an incorrect perception of my intent when I am quite open with it:



With regards to looking at all sides of an issue I think it's pertinant to look at all the research, limitations included. Looking at all sides is not offensive.
Click to expand...

No. looking at all sides objectively is not offensive. However, looking at one side with obvious bias is counterproductive to the learning process. You are still quite new to all of this. And your posts have been quite telling in their perspective toward the oral philosophy.
 
owen06 said:
I am sorry that you find that offensive, as it is misleading as well. Unfortunatly I am not a web diesigner and cannot change that. It is also statements like that that makes me look at other research as well.
Click to expand...

It is not simply misleading, it is a false statement. And it is used as a selling point for CI.
 
I don't think that is ok. But like I said, I personally can't change it.
 
owen06 said:
Saying that I am on here to prove a person wrong, when I have never, ever said that, is not an opinion, it was a statement. It was an attempt at circumventing my requests for the information. Even when I've added the information I've said that I'm not trying to discount the studies. That is not trying to prove people wrong so yes, it is a blatant lie and it is offensive.
Click to expand...

Calm down. The administrators are watching us. LinuxGold did a good sticky post on the top of this subcategory. I agree with him we do not need more wars, but listen to both sides. For example, when you was provided with a research on early ASL, you discounted it's practical by claiming that ASL is too hard to learn for hearing parents in general, without backing up that claim with research.

You are free to make that claim, but you also have to accept that I don't care much about providing papers to people making this kind of replies to research. How many times do I have to expain this simple fact to you?
 
jillio said:
No. looking at all sides objectively is not offensive. However, looking at one side with obvious bias is counterproductive to the learning process. You are still quite new to all of this. And your posts have been quite telling in their perspective toward the oral philosophy.
Click to expand...


I have read all of the papers you have supplied and most of the other papers recently posted. There is no bias, sorry you see one. What I do have a problem with, is the constant arguing and accusations. This is supposed to be a discussion.

My posts have also said this:

I think that ASL is great when children get an accurate portrayal of it.
Click to expand...
 
owen06 said:
I don't think that is ok. But like I said, I personally can't change it.
Click to expand...

Change comes from advocacy. You may not be able to change the wording on the website, but you most certainly can speak out against the injustice perpetrated through such false statements.
 
owen06 said:
I have read all of the papers you have supplied and most of the other papers recently posted. There is no bias, sorry you see one. What I do have a problem with, it the constant arguing and accusations. This is supposed to be a discussion.

My posts have also said this:
Click to expand...

And again, you are qualifying your statement with a slant toward the hearing parent.
 
jillio said:
It is a statement based on opinion. Perhaps you should look at the ways in which you are giving others an incorrect perception of your intent. I always find it odd that the hearing are quick to point out the perceived offensiveness of the deaf without ever taking into consideration their own offensive remarks.
Click to expand...

Yes. I have sometimes wondered what would happend if those hearing people who are so easily offended became deaf. My bet is they would turn into some extreme deaf power manics by all the insulting comments from the larger society, and becoming far more anti-CI than I am :)
 
flip said:
Calm down. The administrators are watching us. LinuxGold did a good sticky post on the top of this subcategory. I agree with him we do not need more wars, but listen to both sides. For example, when you was provided with a research on early ASL, you discounted it's practical by claiming that ASL is too hard to learn for hearing parents in general, without backing up that claim with research.

You are free to make that claim, but you also have to accept that I don't care much about providing papers to people making this kind of replies to research. How many times do I have to expain this simple fact to you?
Click to expand...

I made that statement because that is what I read. I will find the paper again and get back to you by Saturday.

I am looking at both sides and I still think that early ASL works, I never said that it didn't.
 
Back
Top