Chris,
Well I guess this is just exactly what I thought you meant:
> From: "Chris Lofting" <ddiamond@ozemail.com.au>
> Reply-To: moq_discuss@moq.org
> Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 03:25:28 +1100
> To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
> Subject: RE: MD EITHER/OR, BOTH/AND
>
> E,
> wonderful example of mis-reading, you make assumptions opposite to what is
> intended! cool!
> I have no interest in Plato -- burn him, he is no longer 'of value', start
> again based on the recursive what/where distinction-making in the neurology
> and see what you get...
-and I think that explains pretty sucessfully why I don't have much patience
for your whole program. You really haven't valued Plato enough to bother to
understand him - and you think your neurological nothing such a beautiful
outcome that it justifies your joyful ignorance about contrary veiws. You
don't treat a 'veiw' about what Plato is saying as a worthwhile place to
start from? Well this is exactly what I thought was wrong in your talk of a
'reveiw'.
Pzeph
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:00:54 BST