Man has been aware of his anatomy and colors from day one.
i design using with anatomical form and you design with colors.
Besides your high intellect , which I admire, how do we differ in
our love to express our selves ?
mando
On Oct 25, 2008, at 7:59 AM, William Conger wrote:
Thanks to Miller. He recognizes my love of vivid humor. And
Michael can be pretty funny in his facility with puns. After all,
philosophy can be so morbid, so dark in its hooded gravitas, so
mumble-mumble. It begs for clown's shoes now and then. And
slapstick truth. My antagonism aimed at Miller, and all the
others, is actually an eruption of old urban habits, those one
learns among the tougher, more inventive kids in gritty city
neighborhoods, who readily fight among themselves to prove
allegiance to a mutual wariness of the outside authority. Miller is
a city guy. He understands the fight. I just wish he'd get past
the 19C junk he likes the most.
WC
--- On Sat, 10/25/08, Chris Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
From: Chris Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: William's ad hominems
To: [email protected]
Date: Saturday, October 25, 2008, 8:13 AM
I have to admit -- that I found this list of ad hominems a
real hoot -- and
broke out laughing time and time again.
William draws these short phrases with the same strength,
buoyancy, and
tension as he draws those heavy black lines that snake
across his large
canvases.
So now -- I suppose I should go back through the archives
and find all the
choice words he's had to say about me. As I recall,
he's recommended me for
psychiatric care many, many times - but I'm afraid that
I do have some better
ways to spend my time.
Since so much (perhaps all) of aesthetics is based on
personal authority --
it's no big surprise that this authority gets defended
by personal insult --
it comes with the territory -- and I appreciate that at
least William can
occasionally deliver his with some humor and style.
"those circus people who pound nails up their
noses" -- what a hoot! -- how
did I ever miss that one the first time around ?
****************
Cheerskep drives home his point again.....like those circus
people who pound
nails up their noses.
very narrow, literalist and mechanical
don't worry, I won't paraphrase you. I prefer
good logic.
Cheerskep's obsession
annoying smug assumptions
Cheerskep claims to be the father philosopher
he lurks like a street mugger eager to pounce on any
strolling IS that h
appens by.
Cheerskep, for all his own achievements, is far, far down
the hill from
Kuspit
If he were to become dictator he's insist on solipsism
as a constitutional
ammendment.
Cheerskep just can't stand being confronted by anyone
who wants to dig
intob&
He is simply rigidly stuck to his idea and it's not
sufficiently
demonstrated.
self serving
The more Cheerskep toots a one note horn
It does nothing for Cheerskep's argument to keep whap,
whap, whapping the
dead horse
He's very testy about his assertive notions
Spurious
19C cane-whacking outbursts
Cheerskep does not allow a third party (like a jury) to
reveal whether or not
everyone, usually excepting himself, is philosophically,
logically,
linguistically muddled.
maybe it's just that his comments are too long and
seem to stray from any clear outlook.
Cheerskep, suddenly alert, happily wrings his hands.
The two of them [Cheerskep and Michael Brady] are like the
motorcycle cops
hiding behind facing billboards and all too ready for those
reckless kids
speeding by in red sportscars.
In Michael's case I suspect a Jesuit education
afflicts him; that's bad enough; in Cheerskep's I
think it's a lingering Harvard narcissism.
One never fully recovers from Jesuit or Harvard education.
I think you philosophers are lost in the wilderness.
sexist and banal.
Cheerskep's Bible sermon
_____________________________________________________________
Need cash? Click to get a cash advance.
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2211/fc/
Ioyw6ijlfa8NTMheW0V26MtE1O3JKe
7988Oa1AbjuoqxVt7qMBRDV6/?count=1234567890
