On 01/11/2014 04:41 PM, Nick Thompson wrote: > Neither you nor Marcus seem to have much enthusiasm for this argument, and I > think every body else is bored cross-eyed by it, and I am not sure I > understand it, and all my attempts to clarify it are treated as nit-picking, > so ...
Nit picking is not pejorative. If there were no nit-picking, there'd be no science, no space travel, no legislation, ... nothing. Hell, even picking actual nits out of your neighbor's fur is helpful. > Let's just say you won and drop it. I am really happy with that resolution. > > > Agreed? No. I don't treat forfeits as if they're victories. But I'm happy to abort the attempt at rational discussion. As I tried to make clear, I don't actually believe the aphorism, anyway ... which is why my enthusiasm for defending it may seem lacking. That aphorism "He who has the gold rules" is as idealistic and silly as any other over simplification. That libertarians might like it better than the other one: "Conservatives get upset when somebody gets something they didn't earn; Liberals get upset when somebody doesn't get something they did earn." Just means that libertarians are fond of over-simplification. -- ⇒⇐ glen e. p. ropella Sign my release from this planet's erosion ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
