[Platt] Boring. [Arlo] And accurate. Again, reflect a bit on your inability and refusal to answer, and your need to engage in games in rhetoric instead. Maybe you'll learn something about yourself.
-------------------- [Platt] Now you can't make up your mind whether you have read Lila or not. If I am a coward, you are a pitiful joke. So there. [Arlo] Whether I've read it or not is moot (I have). The fact remains you continue to dodge this simple question. YOU denigrate "chance" saying "it's not chance, it's DQ". YOU provide me ONE distinction, JUST ONE between the two. Ask yourself, why is that simple question one you have to run from? What does it say about you that you'd resort to turning that one question into the latest Limbaugh show with evasions, distractions, and rhetorical tricks, all designed for one purpose; to conceal the fact that you CAN'T and WON'T answer. That's okay. Really. I do understand why. What I am continually amazed by is how you are so unable to reflect on WHY you can't answer this question, why it's more important to you do always duck and cover. I call that intellectual dishonesty, and I'm sure by now everyone who has been following this would agree. You retort with the pedantic "read the book". It's a nice Limbaughian evasion, except it doesn't hold. Still, I've then asked you to "kindly point out ONE passage in LILA you feel illustrates a distinction between "chance" and "DQ"." Just ONE. Page number. Paragraph. ONE PASSAGE. But you know you can't do this. But rather than admit it, rather than be HONEST about it, you opt to play even more rhetorical games. Seriously, reflect on that. Taking the shame you should feel at that aside, what does that say about YOU? It's too bad you lack the balls to just say "intent". I mean, it's obvious that this is the distinction you keep alluding to when you denigrate "oops". You see DQ as an "intentional force". One that plans, orders and enacts its plan based on deliberate intent. "Man" was not a accident, he was carefully planned and the cosmos deliberately ordered so as to produce him. THIS is what you feel DQ is. "Qualigod". This is the worldview that inevitably leads to saying that millions and millions of years of dinos and jungles and what-not that preceded "man" were placed there by DQ so that one day it's ultimate creation (man) would have fossil fuels. (If "man" was the plan from the start, why else waste so many millions of years of existence populating the earth with giant lizards and tropical ferns?) In any event, I'll accept your cowardice and dishonesty, but rest assured that every time you denigrate "chance" or "oops", I'll start this thread up again, ask you the same question, and give you yet another opportunity to show off some evasions and distractions. 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/
