Edwina, List: ET: You are misinterpreting what I said and writing misleading comments about it.
Another pot is calling another kettle black, except that I provided links to the specific posts that I quoted so that others could see the complete contexts for themselves. That is precisely why I always include the CP/EP/NEM/R citation and year of composition with everything that I quote from Peirce. ET: Here's the quote from me that you used - you selected only a few phrases and left out the totality. Why did you do so? Again, I provided links to the original posts and only quoted the portions that I considered to be especially inappropriate. Why fill up an e-mail with lengthy excerpts? ET: I specifically have said that what I am against is when people don't provide us with how these theories can be applied to explain actual situations in the real world. That's a HUGE difference from your assertion that I am against theories or theorizing. First, where did I make any such assertion? Specific examples, please. Second, I fail to see the allegedly "HUGE difference" here. It sure sounds to me like a *demand *that any and all theorizing *must *include "how these theories can be applied to explain actual situations in the real world." Regards, Jon Alan Schmidt - Olathe, Kansas, USA Professional Engineer, Amateur Philosopher, Lutheran Layman www.LinkedIn.com/in/JonAlanSchmidt - twitter.com/JonAlanSchmidt On Thu, May 14, 2020 at 3:15 PM Edwina Taborsky <[email protected]> wrote: > JAS > > You are misinterpreting what I said and writing misleading comments about > it. > > I didn't say that I was against theory: What I said was that I was against > their isolation from the real world. You constantly ignore this fact and > present a false image of me. Here's the quote from me that you used - you > selected only a few phrases and left out the totality. Why did you do so? > > EDWINA" "As for diagrams and models - formulas and terms - I'm not arguing > against them. I'm asking - can they be applied to real situations in the > actual world - to explain this real world? > > As for asking others to provide examples - I've done so repeatedly, and > have found that most prefer the isolation and comfort of what I call 'the > seminar room' - ie, discussions around terms and models...far, far, far > from the real empirical objective world." > > -------------------- > > My comments above are very different from your statement that I am against > theories and theorizing; > > My comments do NOT say - as you rewrite them - that I consider > that theorizing is "an irrelevant exercise" undertaken only by people who > "prefer the isolation and comfort of what [she calls] 'the seminar room' > > Why do you write that I said this? I said that I am NOT AGAINST theories > or theorizing. I did not say that I consider that theorizing is 'undertaken > only by people'...etc. ..Read what I wrote - and please stop picking out > bits and pieces and making my meaning completely different. > > I specifically have said that what I am against is when people don't > provide us with how these theories can be applied to explain actual > situations in the real world. That's a HUGE difference from your assertion > that I am against theories or theorizing. It baffles me why you stick so > tenaciously to such a misinterpretation - despite my actual words! > > Edwina >
----------------------------- PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to [email protected] . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to [email protected] with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .
