And Platt, you didn't need to look up a defintion of "sugar" to know the relevant meaning (the difference in meaning relative to arsenic).
If you did you'd find "sugar" was a very ambiguous, context dependent term, none of whose definitions would have any bearing on whether or not you chose to take the arsenic. Ian On 4/30/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Quoting ian glendinning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > Platt said > > > > > ... but without [definition] > > > we couldn't understand one another at all. > > > > That is patently untrue. We value and understand many things by shared > > aesthetic experience. Definition is something done with hindsight - > > for good pragmatic simplification reasons, in context etc ... but it > > is not at all "necessary" for understanding. > > > > It is "always" a compromise, a dumbing down, a devaluing, and is far > > from necessary. > > I for one am glad to know the difference in meaning between "sugar" and > "arsenic." > > ------------------------------------------------- > This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/ > 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/ > 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/
