I know that some subjects cause emotional responses. These responses are
often filled with hyperbole: Carly is the *absolute worst* CEO that ever ran
a company. Walter Hewlett is the *biggest back stabbing spoiled rich kid
academic* ever to sit on a BOD. Saddam is the perpetrator of the *most
heinous crimes* in the history of crime. UNIX is the *worst operating
system* ever devised by man or engineer. The HP 3000 is *the greatest
platform* in computerdom.  The list goes on.

Such usage generally is of little value to rational debate.  Hyperbole's
purpose is not to elicit response. Like all forms of rhetoric it is a verbal
assault not a dialog tool. You cannot argue against hyperbole except to
disavow it's veracity.

One of the biggest uses of hyperbole in a recent post was made by our friend
and colleague Alfredo Rego. His waxing eloquent and quoting of the Bard on
the glories of Autumn was hyperbole at its best and a joy to read. There can
be no argument against, "This thou perceiv'st, which makes thy love more
strong, To love that well which thou must leave ere long." Either you see
Autumn that way or you don't but you cannot argue the logic.
This shows that hyperbole is tool to be used. Like all tools it can be used
to enhance knowledge or stifle it. It can be used to help or to hinder. It
can be used wisely or foolishly. It's our choice.
Yosef (Joseph) Rosenblatt
(508) 249-2311 (Direct)
(508) 435-1000 ext. 42311
[log in to unmask]

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *