> Hey Matt, you have to realize that I'm way too lazy to go back and reread
> whatever you are referring to here, so, I'm just kind of confused since I
> don't remember what we were talking about. :)
I know, me too. Besides being lazy, I'm terribly busy, and about to get busier
with seminars on Hawthorne and Native American literature (plus teaching
composition). I wanted to suggest starting the conversation over, but that's
somewhat presumptuous ("hey, would you mind starting over for me?"). And I can
tell pretty much everyone's nerves are fried, so I'm not even sure why anyone
is talking about "it" anymore (considering no one can apparently agree on what
"it" refers to).
> I have no overwhelming compulsion to "adequately describe" Arlo's viewpoint.
I'm not sure what you mean here, because as I'm about to teach to my freshmen,
if you can't adequately describe an opposing viewpoint, you will have a tough
time opposing anything other than what your presumed opponent can rightly call
a strawman.
There are limits, like patience: perhaps one thinks that a different viewpoint
is so beneath them that spending the time and energy to get into its tissue
could otherwise be called a "waste of time." But when one reaches those
limits, where one doesn't care about getting another's viewpoint right, I think
it becomes an occasion to wonder what you are doing by conversing with the
other person.
I wanted to get to know your viewpoint, Mary, like I wanted to get to know
Marsha's (and I once wanted to get to know Bo's and Mr. Buchanan's), but it
sounds like those things aren't in our mutual realm of ability. Good luck.
Matt
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/md/archives.html
