Hmmm.

Apparently I (or my blog, it was hard to tell from the description) am supercilious, or at least perceived to be, by some persons (on that page, Deus Lo Vult is the nineteenth point down). My original reaction was to take an amount of umbrage at this description, which then resided when I had a think about what was written, and then mostly disappeared when I saw that there was a few definitions of the word supercilious that I hadn't used the word myself for before. Because, while I in no way aim to write in a style that presents me as:

haughtily disdainful or contemptuous, as a person

I would, however, be happy if people believed my blog was:

having or showing arrogant superiority to and disdain of those one views as unworthy

Because that's generally what I've tried to write with in mind. Wait, no, hear me out. This blog isn't an essay, it's not assessable, and there's no question or topic to write about. Yes, it is, in fact, multiple writings about my opinions of things and topics that pop into my head randomly. There is nothing that dictates what I write about, and there certainly is nothing dictating what I can say. Which is why I would expect a blog to have the styles of the second definition I have included above, and not the first. Because, for as supercilious as the blog may appear to be, the blog is not me. The blog is just characters on a screen, arranged in a certain way so that multiple meanings can be drawn from them. Thus, for someone who may, in fact, be in the demographic I was deriding in my previous post, they would read that as think that I was an offensive person to be saying such things. Then, perhaps, if someone came along who had had a similar experience as I had in that crowd, and read my post, then they may very well agree. Similarly, a
person may arrive at this blog and find that post rather funny. There's a variety of reactions that can be had to each post anyone puts up on any blog, least of all mine.

The question that is raised with the aforementioned description of this blog is that is it naive of a person to assume that the blog is the author and the author is the blog? Is what I write strictly and solely everything I believe on that topic, or is it just one little spiel at a moment in time and an attempt to illicit a response from an audience? It is my belief (and I have always written to this belief) that it is the latter, and I am certainly not this blog. Anyone who knows me knows that I hold many people of the senior generation in such a high regard it's rather strange. People who know me also know that I am also very easily annoyed, and something like being brushed by a hat is quite easily catalyst enough to just piss me right off. Does this make me a supercilious person? No, it does not. It makes me a strange, tightly-wound person who writes a blog to express his views on events in his life.

Which is why I didn't take any lasting offense at being called supercilious, because my personal opinion is that a blog and its author are separate entities within society, both with different functions. Of course, some may very well argue that they at more closely associated than I would have you believe ...

Actually, this is a good argument to run an example from. My opinion is that blog and blogger are separate. What I could argue, which would require consideration, listening and 'taking on' of others opinions or arguments, is that they are closer than I give them credit for. It doesn't mean I believe it, but it does show that I have the capability of critical thinking. But there's a place and a time for critical thinking (like an essay, or something that's assessable, or if there was a question or topic to write about), and it is not at a blog that I use to write my opinions on.
Purely and simply, this is an opinion piece. There's no serious research going on, and any evidence I bring in is merely there to back up my opinion. And my opinion does sometimes run against what I can, and have, argued in more formal settings. But how many people can really say they've answered an essay question with garble that they don't believe in, but they know that the lecturer does and, therefore, write with an audience in mind.

So, yeah, this blog may appear supercilious, and that's something I have no qualms about. If you think I am supercilious, you're wrong, and I have absolute disdain for your opinion and views and arrogantly disregard your worth. Not really, but you would have a hard time standing up to the argument that I'm supercilious.

Thomas.