Ant,
Ant McWatt wrote:
>
> On Thu, 15 Oct 1998 21:15:28 +0000 Diana McPartlin
> <diana@hongkong.com> wrote:
>
> > Jonathan B. Marder wrote:
> >
> > > PLATT
> > > >> I suggest we challenge objectivists to prove to
> > > >> the world why this is so. ["beautifully intuitive" is
> > > the way to reality and truth]
> >
> >
> > > DIANA
> > > >Their answer is that it is a subjective thing and consequently cannot
> > > be
> > > >proven. It's the wrong answer, but that's their answer nonetheless.
> >
> >
> > > Intuition is *not* subjective! Neither is it infallible. It is a Quality
> > > tool and objectivists use it all the time. After verifying the result,
> > > they replace the "intuition" with a reasoned justification (though the
> > > "beauty" often remains).
> >
> > <sigh> Read what I wrote Jonathan.
> >
> > I give up.
> >
> > Diana
>
> 16th October 1998
>
> Diana,
>
> Don't give up!!!
>
> Instead, why don't you try to reply to the last three LS
> e-mails from Jonathan, Platt and Bo from your "romantic"
> side (which we all know you have now from the Lantern
> Festival)?
Actually I was thinking that myself. I mean I'm obviously not getting
anywhere by being direct and logical. Maybe they aren't reading my posts
properly, or maybe they're not opening their minds to them. It's not
that I'm wrong, I'm just not being persuasive.
I've been trying to compose a reply to Roger Parker's last post. I know
what I want to say but the challenge of writing it down in a way that it
will be understood has got me completely stumped.
l8r
Diana
homepage - http://www.moq.org
queries - mailto:moq@moq.org
unsubscribe - mailto:majordomo@moq.org with UNSUBSCRIBE MOQ_DISCUSS in
body of email
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:35 BST