John M wrote:
> --- Georges Quénot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> John M wrote:
>>> Don't be a sourpus, I was not attacking YOU.
>> Well. I do not know exactly why I felt concerned.
>> I probably missed your point.
>>> By George! (not Georges) don't you imply such things
>>> into my mind after my decade under nazis and two under
>>> commis, now 3+ in the (hypocritical) US 'free' speach!
>> Well. OK Again. But what was your point then?
> I am not sure whether I wrote this to you in personal
> or list-mail, you did not quote my text.
I think it was on the list (I just hit "reply").
> After going through a thousand posts of the same
> subject and none is relevant to my thinking, forgive
> me if I get edgy. I do not repeat the exercise to find
> where and upon what did I write what.
> Could you leave it this way?
> I did not want to offend you.
That's OK. I must be too sensitive on these subjects.
I do not want the debate to turn passionate either.
I was just asking what you intended to mean by:
] 2. Is reasonable or rational thinking exclusive for
] ONLY those, who live in a 'numbers' obsession?
] or is it an elitist heaughtiness to look down to all,
] who do not share such obsession? How about vice versa?
] 3. Suppose the 'numbers based' worldview gains
] universal approval (by ~3006?) - what will that help
] in the betterment of the world? or even in the
] betterment of human thinking? Or even of more civil
] general life- conditions?
What you said just above is a sufficient answer for me.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at