Carl Rogers manifesto

On Sept 9, 2007 in MTR, in response to Carl's rejection of accepted
naming conventions on Japanese highway in lieu of his own made up
conventions, I posed the question 'who does Carl Rogers think he is?'
http://groups.google.com/group/misc....ba76a847687f4e

This was the same date as Carl declared "I no longer find MTR and RAD a
useful medium."

However Carl sent me an email supposedly in response to my question.
Below is a c/p of the unedited email. I'll let you form your own
conclusions.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> Mr Piehl:
>
> Greetings. Read on if you wish; discard if that suits your need.
>
> This letter should satisfy your question. On the newsgroups MTR and RAD,
> you recently asked me "who do you think you are?". I'll begin w/ what I
> am:
>
> I am a Psychology student, whose field is not precisely similar to hard
> sciences like geology, and physiology. The Psychology field rests upon
> operational definition (i.e., subjective categorisation) that summarises
> the speaker's thoughts. So in effect, every operational definition is
> *unique* to the person who created it. That's the reality of the
> situation, though many others are not aware of it. That's fine; not
> everybody is aspiring to be a psychologist. I use operational definition.
>
> I also was born in the Midwest, where from a young age I guided my family
> around suburbs by memorising roads in the area. The intent was, and still
> is, to be helpful and unique in delivery. Each time, they got to their
> destination.
>
> I don't believe in Christianity, and it derivatives of its "God". I
> believe creator(s) may exist, w/ or w/o an assigned gender. I also
> believe the term good cannot be defined in a universal sense.
>
> Now, just who do I think I am? I'm one who loves roads, loves the art of
> human cognition, and am passionate in the fields that I participate. This
> conceptualisation runs independent of what anyone else thinks, though I do
> care about people. Even some whose viewpoints don't match mine. More on
> that in a bit.
>
> There are large communities that accept either road discussion or
> psychological operational-definition. In terms of MTR and RAD, the
> mixture did not necessarily apply.
>
> This may contrast in other field of science where weight is predefined in
> "kilograms" and "pounds".
>
> In terms of traveling the world and interacting w/ other people,
> operational definition has worked beautifully.
>
> Over the past few years, I've come the realisation that MTR and RAD
> largely emply a "hard-science" approach for road components. In effect,
> that made me the "minority" since the usage of operational-definiton does
> not apply. I don't mind being in the minority, since I often accept the
> interpretation of others. Without unique interpretation, the field of
> Psychology would not exist. I realise MTR and RAD are not psychology
> groups.
>
> There is a limit, and rightfully so, to when I object to feedback. This
> involves attack of personal character because my realm of thought
> (operational definition) is seen as "objectionable".
>
> Picture this. You bought a new car. Nice, red and shiny. You drive it
> home. Your neighbour tells you to change the rims. Seemed like a
> harmless request. Everyday, that same neighbour tells you to alter your
> car in a different way, because it's out in public view. You won't,
> because it's your car. The neighbour eventually starts making subtle jabs
> at your personal character. You're fine w/ that, and dismiss it, because
> it happens once or twice. But imagine that same person doing this every
> single time you pull in your car while he's outside. You begin to block
> his phone number. He then begins to create flyers attacking your personal
> character for reasons other than what he thinks of your car. Someone
> picks up that flyer and begins to chase down your personal information
> further, up to and including your private (non-disclosed) information.
>
> I ask you, Mr Piehl, how would you feel? Then, when you (as the
> recipient) retaliate, are perceived as the enemy to the flyer-recipients
> for standing up for yourself in the first place! I hope you catch the
> drift.
>
> In terms of MTR and RAD, you're probably aware that I no longer am
> participating there. This may please you as well as others. Frankly, it
> pleases me as well.
>
> Be that as it may, I'd like to suggest the following. You'll come across
> other people in life who perceive something completely different than
> yourself... I suggest you take time to hear their unique interpretation.
> Even if it seems to be the complete antithesis of what you believe. I do
> it all the time. If it doesn't match your approach, try to understand.
> Who knows, you may have a child or grandchild one day who is independently
> motivated and not attracted to hard-sciences. Should he or she receive
> the same treatment? Would you want to see them receive harsh treatment
> for engaging in his or her interest?
>
> I've seen your contributions to viatology and have enjoyed the artwork it
> presented.
>
> The world is not about assimilation, Mr Piehl. It would make life easier,
> but life is chaotic by definition. There is more than one way to measure
> a concept, or progress towards a goal. If there's one thing I can convey
> to you, it's just that.
>
> As you may guess, the Worldwide Highway Library will not change because
> the general public has never "heard" something in a unique way. I've
> received pleasant feedback from several countries, including the USA. I
> will no longer focus on MTR and RAD, whose perception is counterintuitive
> to the goals my website originally set.
>
> If I don't hear back from you, I bid you farewell and wish you the best in
> life's events. That said, I have learned from our interactions and have
> noted the points-of-view you've presented.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Carl Rogers
> San Francisco, Calif., USA, and Deming, NM, USA
> mailto > http://worldwide-hwys.calrog.com
> http://www.myspace.com/calrog
>

--
My mother always said two things: never argue with crazy people and
always wear clean underwear in case you get run over by a tank and
have to go to the hospital.

--Hawkeye Pierce

On Nov 7, 8:39 am, Rich Piehl >
wrote:
> On Sept 9, 2007 in MTR, in response to Carl's rejection of accepted
> naming conventions on Japanese highway in lieu of his own made up
> conventions, I posed the question 'who does Carl Rogers think he is?'http://groups.google.com/group/misc.transport.road/msg/02ba76a847687f4e
>
> This was the same date as Carl declared "I no longer find MTR and RAD a
> useful medium."
>
> However Carl sent me an email supposedly in response to my question.
> Below is a c/p of the unedited email. I'll let you form your own
> conclusions.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> > Mr Piehl:
>
> > Greetings. Read on if you wish; discard if that suits your need.
>
> > This letter should satisfy your question. On the newsgroups MTR and RAD,
> > you recently asked me "who do you think you are?". I'll begin w/ what I
> > am:
>
> > I am a Psychology student, whose field is not precisely similar to hard
> > sciences like geology, and physiology. The Psychology field rests upon
> > operational definition (i.e., subjective categorisation) that summarises
> > the speaker's thoughts. So in effect, every operational definition is
> > *unique* to the person who created it. That's the reality of the
> > situation, though many others are not aware of it. That's fine; not
> > everybody is aspiring to be a psychologist. I use operational definition.
>
> > I also was born in the Midwest, where from a young age I guided my family
> > around suburbs by memorising roads in the area. The intent was, and still
> > is, to be helpful and unique in delivery. Each time, they got to their
> > destination.
>
> > I don't believe in Christianity, and it derivatives of its "God". I
> > believe creator(s) may exist, w/ or w/o an assigned gender. I also
> > believe the term good cannot be defined in a universal sense.
>
> > Now, just who do I think I am? I'm one who loves roads, loves the art of
> > human cognition, and am passionate in the fields that I participate. This
> > conceptualisation runs independent of what anyone else thinks, though I do
> > care about people. Even some whose viewpoints don't match mine. More on
> > that in a bit.
>
> > There are large communities that accept either road discussion or
> > psychological operational-definition. In terms of MTR and RAD, the
> > mixture did not necessarily apply.
>
> > This may contrast in other field of science where weight is predefined in
> > "kilograms" and "pounds".
>
> > In terms of traveling the world and interacting w/ other people,
> > operational definition has worked beautifully.
>
> > Over the past few years, I've come the realisation that MTR and RAD
> > largely emply a "hard-science" approach for road components. In effect,
> > that made me the "minority" since the usage of operational-definiton does
> > not apply. I don't mind being in the minority, since I often accept the
> > interpretation of others. Without unique interpretation, the field of
> > Psychology would not exist. I realise MTR and RAD are not psychology
> > groups.
>
> > There is a limit, and rightfully so, to when I object to feedback. This
> > involves attack of personal character because my realm of thought
> > (operational definition) is seen as "objectionable".
>
> > Picture this. You bought a new car. Nice, red and shiny. You drive it
> > home. Your neighbour tells you to change the rims. Seemed like a
> > harmless request. Everyday, that same neighbour tells you to alter your
> > car in a different way, because it's out in public view. You won't,
> > because it's your car. The neighbour eventually starts making subtle jabs
> > at your personal character. You're fine w/ that, and dismiss it, because
> > it happens once or twice. But imagine that same person doing this every
> > single time you pull in your car while he's outside. You begin to block
> > his phone number. He then begins to create flyers attacking your personal
> > character for reasons other than what he thinks of your car. Someone
> > picks up that flyer and begins to chase down your personal information
> > further, up to and including your private (non-disclosed) information.
>
> > I ask you, Mr Piehl, how would you feel? Then, when you (as the
> > recipient) retaliate, are perceived as the enemy to the flyer-recipients
> > for standing up for yourself in the first place! I hope you catch the
> > drift.
>
> > In terms of MTR and RAD, you're probably aware that I no longer am
> > participating there. This may please you as well as others. Frankly, it
> > pleases me as well.
>
> > Be that as it may, I'd like to suggest the following. You'll come across
> > other people in life who perceive something completely different than
> > yourself... I suggest you take time to hear their unique interpretation.
> > Even if it seems to be the complete antithesis of what you believe. I do
> > it all the time. If it doesn't match your approach, try to understand.
> > Who knows, you may have a child or grandchild one day who is independently
> > motivated and not attracted to hard-sciences. Should he or she receive
> > the same treatment? Would you want to see them receive harsh treatment
> > for engaging in his or her interest?
>
> > I've seen your contributions to viatology and have enjoyed the artwork it
> > presented.
>
> > The world is not about assimilation, Mr Piehl. It would make life easier,
> > but life is chaotic by definition. There is more than one way to measure
> > a concept, or progress towards a goal. If there's one thing I can convey
> > to you, it's just that.
>
> > As you may guess, the Worldwide Highway Library will not change because
> > the general public has never "heard" something in a unique way. I've
> > received pleasant feedback from several countries, including the USA. I
> > will no longer focus on MTR and RAD, whose perception is counterintuitive
> > to the goals my website originally set.
>
> > If I don't hear back from you, I bid you farewell and wish you the best in
> > life's events. That said, I have learned from our interactions and have
> > noted the points-of-view you've presented.
>
> > Cheers,
>
> > Carl Rogers
> > San Francisco, Calif., USA, and Deming, NM, USA
> > mailto > >http://worldwide-hwys.calrog.com
> >http://www.myspace.com/calrog

The letter should be Calrog's newest book

Arif Khokar wrote:
> Rich Piehl wrote:
>
>> On Sept 9, 2007 in MTR, in response to Carl's rejection of accepted
>> naming conventions on Japanese highway in lieu of his own made up
>> conventions, I posed the question 'who does Carl Rogers think he is?'
>
> And I guess you're too stupid to figure out how to only post in
> newsgroups you actually read.

Thank you for, once again, being a jerk Arif. How would you know which
newsgroups I read?

Besides, I thought you had me kill filed?

Take care,
Rich

God bless the USA

--
My mother always said two things: never argue with crazy people and
always wear clean underwear in case you get run over by a tank and
have to go to the hospital.

--Hawkeye Pierce

Arif Khokar wrote:

> And I guess you're too stupid to figure out how to only post in
> newsgroups you actually read.

I guess you forget that krl wafts his prenumbral emisions over to RAD, too.
It's a relevant cross-post. Don't you have some bitching about how yr
oppressed by THE MAN for not being allowed to drive 90 mph on residential
streets and school zones to do, or something?

--
Comrade Otto Yamamoto
http://mryamamoto.50megs.com
Decreasing the signal, increasing the NOISE!
I'm in yr Milk making yr Young Ladies Breasts Bigger!