Hey Steve, actually I didn't shift context at all. You asked me to do something for you, and I declined, preferring that you do it yourself. Where's the context shift? A context shift would be if you had asked me, and all of a sudden I was up in your grill about something, which is not the case. Jeez.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray27" <steve.sundur@...> wrote: > > Jim, is this akin to "shifting the context". > > You made a declaration. Someone, (me in this case), asked to provide some > evidence for it, and you declined. And now, LG is one having to explain > himself? Jeez. > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > I taught difficult technical material to adults for twenty years, by > > learning it on my own, first. Time for you to get off your ass and do it > > yourself...I am amazed at your snarkiness, given that you were supposedly a > > professor of something, once. > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, laughinggull108 <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > Aw shucks, dumbass, I was rooting for ya not only that you *would* do it > > > but *could* do it...very similar to the "dog ate my homework". Well, > > > Steve, it'll remain in the holy archives that you *did* try, just as > > > others here have asked those "in the know" to interpret the writings of > > > you know who. The evidence seems to be leaning towards nobody really > > > knows what he's talking about. Too bad as I was really hoping that we had > > > a saint in our midst. > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Sorry Steve, too much trouble. That's why I am retired - don't have to > > > > do the heavy lifting anymore.:-) > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "seventhray27" <steve.sundur@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, doctordumbass@ <no_reply@> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Last week, I somehow found myself reading about fossils and the best > > > > > places to find them. Sedimentary rock, that which is formed by > > > > > compression is the only place they are found, vs. in igneous and > > > > > metamorphic rocks. > > > > > > > > > > > > Robin has the writing ability to work methodically down through the > > > > > fossil record, to the bedrock, when approaching someone's > > > > > consciousness. > > > > > For those who doubt this, diagram out any of his writing, and you will > > > > > see clear first, second, and third set assumptions, each supported by > > > > > the previous. Very clean and perfectly constructed. > > > > > > > > > > Jim, I find this interesting. I realize it might entail some work on > > > > > your part, but could you give an example of this. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This approach of Robin's, then, can be substantiated as being in the > > > > > very least, logical. Through the reactions of his targets, including > > > > > himself, he also (inadvertently?) reveals something about how we see > > > > > ourselves, often as a shifting mass of emotionally tinged reactions, > > > > > jellied memories. Not through this verifiable, logical deduction. > > > > > > > > > > > > Verifiable, logical deduction works well for external stuff, like > > > > > determining where to find the fossil record. But most people do not > > > > > like > > > > > such dispassionate rigor, applied to their own self-examination. > > > > > > > > > > > > So Judy can argue for the validity of Robin's writing, and Steve can > > > > > argue for its discomfort, and both are correct. > > > > > > > > > > > > Which then begs the question, if FFL is all about a search for > > > > > > meaning > > > > > and personal truth, what are those people doing on here, who > > > > > continually > > > > > avoid personal truth, by shifting context? What is the implicit > > > > > agreement we have all made, to validate the dialogue here, seek > > > > > personal > > > > > truth, or be comfortable with each other? Or both? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
