I think you understand my point:
"Where possible, it is ALWAYS good to get to know who is saying what so that what is being said can be measured by the history of who is saying it."
when considering the significance of the message and the messenger.

Just relax and say your piece, learn and move on. Don't be too stuck on technicalities.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

You asked: "Can you point out if I at least began with a neutral open-ended stance?"

* Your post on the "(Forget Cosby) Were the comments on point or not?" thread started out with, "I am focusing on the accuracy of the bashing done by Cosby. It was truly generalized and bigoted bashing...no doubt. But, I am not interested in Cosby's lifestyle or privilege or hypocrisy. I am interested in addressing the reality (or not) that he spoke of."

You took a position about Cosby's statements. You called it "generalized and bigoted bashing" before you went on to ask if there was reality (truth) to the statements.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

You said: "What is bothering me is why it is not mandatory to dismiss one's personal biases and experiences which are variable in order to seek what is fixed (truth)."

* Most people do not recognize that when evaluating truth, their idea of truth is based on personal biases and experiences. Personal biases/experiences cannot be dismissed. First they must be recognized and evaluated to the point of overcoming the unfair aspects of them (to whatever degree people can do that). That is part of the process of seeing fixed truth.

If you give an absolute truth, it may not be interpreted that way by others. Even if you give a neutral view, it may not be interpreted as such. People usually cannot interpret what is coming to them minus their prejudices, biases and fears. People should come to the debate with what they have for the purpose of developing. Genuine reasonings will reveal biases, misinformation, fears etc. and they should be dealt with as part of the reasonings.

People can only see to the extent of their own development and/or willingness to be brutally honest. If you are articulating things differently to the popular mode of speech and conduct, then there will be a greater demand on you to explain a whole lot more in order that you are understood.

Some people try hard to cover up their biases and/or racial prejudices but over time it comes out. They usually act quite defensive when it is pointed out. If they were not trying to conceal aspects of their personalities when engaging these debates they would quickly discover more about themselves and may even make the necessary changes to improve themselves. People will find a fixed truth at the heart of anything if they are so motivated to seek out the truth and are willing to challenge their false pride, biases and fears.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I did not want to get into that Cosby debate, even when it first surfaced. Although there were some good comments in the media, I felt that what was reported to have been said by Cosby was being refuted by some extreme reactions.

It reminded I of how I feel sometimes when Whites get extreme with their language when they feel they have proof that a Black person did wrong. They use the incident to vent their racist feelings. It is the same feelings I had when I read some of the commentaries about Cosby. Racism and/or Colorism can be the fuel behind SOME people's extreme reactions.