Ian:
> Point (1) Dalai Lama is a role, not a person. (He is
> a basically nice
> person, his role is some added complication.)
SA: yes... I see what you mean, now. I think I
merged this point with your second point and got mixed
up. Thanks for clarifying. This 'role' experience,
though, is interesting. This seems to fit in with the
'collective mental activity' that you mentioned
somewhere else. I don't know my understandings are
patternizing connections between seemingly related
points by different events at the moment. Such as
virtual personas. This is also... hmmm... similar to
'gods' or 'spirits in the woods', but on a
intellectual organization level, has to do with the
'Perot and Nirvana' connection.
Ian:
> Point (2) Arguments intended to produce winners and
> losers (eg Chris'
> "cowboys and indians") are destructive - and I avoid
> them except when pragmatically necessary.
SA: Yeah... that's why I said to Chris he was
off-topic to the thread. He was twisting the thread
into something it was not.
Ian:
> If those are clear, ask which other specific thing I
> said is unintelligible ;-)
SA: Nop. That's it. Thanks.
Ian:
> Being unintelligible is a common problem I have - ie
> I was saying I
> was NOT offended by your remark.
SA: Thanks Ian. We ought to chat more often.
nice cold night,
SA
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
