In a message dated 9/30/10 5:40:41 AM, [email protected] cites a George Gissing quote:
> Principles always become a matter of vehement discussion when practice is > at ebb. > The sentence has a nice roll, but why believe it? Forget "proof", let's settle for persuasion. For me, Gissing would have to describe persuasively his notions of "practice at an ebb" and "vehement discussions of principle" (in general? just in aesthetics?). Then Gissing would have to cite, say, three extended periods when "practice was at an ebb" and vehement discussions abounded -- i.e. historical conditions that corroborated his theory. However, I'd also want evidence that he'd done the duly diligent thing of looking for data that contradicted his theory -- i.e. have there been periods in history when, say, practice was at an ebb but there also was no vehement discussion of principle? And vice versa: loads of discussion at the same time as loads of practice? Beware of the eloquent, the articulate. Those traits no more bespeak a pertinent intelligence and dependability than a handsome face and an Ivy League degree.
