Hi Platt,
PLATT:
> An example of switching the rules to suit one's purpose was given by
> Rick when in one instance he insisted we pay attention to what Pirsig
> said EXPLICITLY (yes, he used caps) and in another instance to what
> Pirsig IMPLIED (my caps) with "beautifully subtle rhetoric."
RICK:
Wow Platt... You sure are a sloppy reader.... If you would read more
carefully you would have noticed that I actually wrote, "... Pirsig is
EXPLICITLY pointing out that the deductions in the subsequent lines are only
'absolute' if one has already pre-assumed the principles of the MOQ." I
guess I can't count on you to notice words that I don't put in caps???
Bu tmoreover, it's amazing how you read the word 'explicitly' right out of
my thought... Inserted the word 'implied', which was nowhere in my
thought... and then attacked on that basis (does this really pass for
argument where you come from?).
Now, would you care to respond to the merits of my argument? Or is
misquoting text the extent of your talents?
rick
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
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 - 16:01:52 BST