--- In [email protected], anonymousff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
> --- In [email protected], "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
> > --- In [email protected], anonymousff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> > wrote:
> > Your problem is, you're not making a distinction
> > between what is *self-evidently* true and what is
> > *probably* true.  Your caveat is fine when it comes
> > to what is *probably* true, but it looks real silly
> > with regard to what is self-evidently true.
> 
> Well, this is fascinating. It is self-evidently true for you. It is
> not self-evidently true for me. So in your world, and this is the
> dangerous thing, it appears that you are willing and even feel
> compelled to declare  that that which is self-evident to you to be 
> self-evident for everyone. While I am not stating that you are a
> fanatic, this is the logic and MOs used by fanatics world wide and
> through the ages.

Are you putting me on, or have you decided to
start channeling Barry now? 

It's a great gig if you take it all the way.
Then everything is a wild card, there are no
longer any facts, and you never have to commit
yourself to anything--or better yet, you can
hold two contradictory positions simultaneously
and brag about how enlightened you are to be
able to do so.  Oh, yes, and you can freely
misrepresent what other people have said and
engage in the wildest of hyperbole without 
*any* reference to logic at all.

<snip>
> You KNOW what Wilson meant. Jerry Farwell KNOWs what Jesus meant. 
GWB
> KNOWS what God meant. Bob Brigante KNOWS what MMY meant. Peter KNOWS
> what Krishna meant. Si'ites KNOW what Mohammad meant but Sunnis also
> KNOW what Mohammad meant -- and they are different. Pat Roberson 
KNOWS
> what the founding fathers meant. Critic x KNOWs what TS Elliot meant
> in the Four Quartets. JoeUFO KNOWS what the  Crop Cirles mean. Dick
> Cheny KNOWS what al-Quada meant. Brown KNOWS what the DiVinci code 
meant. 
> 
> I am bent over in laughter. And a bit sad.

Actually, I find it sad that you'd resort to such
a silly argument, which suggests that you're unable
to make the relevant distinctions between the
status of the statement Wilson made and the status
of those you list.
 
<snip>
> > > > it's quite obvious what he meant,
> > > > in context.  
> 
> Not to all readers Judy. Because it is obvious to you, does not make
> it obvious to everyone. Your defense for this proposition appears no
> more sphisticated than "nah nah, everyone who doesn't see things
> like me is STUPID!" (Do they poo poo in their pants too?)

I'm sorry you're insulted.  I'd just suggest that
you READ THE STATEMENT IN CONTEXT, as I did.  Then
it becomes obvious what he meant.

It's obvious for other reasons too, which *should*
have occurred to you by now.

In any event, this has long ceased to be about
Wilson's statement, so I'm bowing out.






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 


Reply via email to