> [Case] > OK, I actually spelled it wrong thinking that typos were not confusing > enough. > > William James Sidis. > > Remember him?
One line about one article by one man does not a convincing case make for Indian influence on the Founding Fathers. Of course, if you start off with a premise like that you can usually find support for your argument. That's pretty much how we think, evidenced by what goes on at this site. [Case] Well, Pirsig says other wise! "It looked as though way back in the thirties Sidis had been on exactly the same thesis about Indians. He was trying to tell people some of the most important things that could be said about their country and they were rewarding him by publicly calling him a 'fool' and failing to publish what he had written. There didn't even seem to be any way to find out what Sidis had said." -Lila This is unbelievable I thought I would never get a chance to use it. So let me see if I can put this as you would: Pirsig said it. I believe it. That settles it! 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/
