I must disagree to agree.

Sometimes I read ideas that I agree with, and yet I feel somehow that I am violating the point by agreeing with it. For example, months ago, J.E. Sawyer wrote this rather excellent post about politics. I felt stupid posting a comment to say “I totally agree”, because I seemed to be committing the error of not critically considering the issue that Sawyer cautioned against. (I posted anyway.)

Now comes this post from Scott Adams which I find very persuasive and thought-provoking. And yet, in linking to it and expressing my agreement, am I not demonstrating the very lack of creativity he describes?


  1. But else can a blogger do? If you look at my posts, virtually all of them are in some way a reaction to something someone else said or did.I've been thinking about it the past couple days, and I've realized that for some of us, like me, what matters is not originality of subject, but originality of analysis.So, I think it's fair to blog about other bloggers so long as you have something interesting to say. (Which you did, BTW, great post.)

What's your stake in this, cowboy?