Dan: I agree with the idea that we ought not limited our selves to any
one book. I was making a totally different point about how much
intellectual quality there can be in novels. That was the Russian
scholar's point too. He was talking about the vast amounts of truth that
can be found in fiction and so was I. If you honestly think I was
picking literature over religion, selecting Dostoevsky over the bible,
or otherwise suggesting some kind of limits, you definitely
mis-understood what I was saying. BEWARE THE MAN OF ONE BOOK, even if
that one book is Lila, right? DMB
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dan Glover [SMTP:glove@indianvalley.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 1999 12:29 PM
> To: moq_discuss@moq.org
> Subject: MD What I remembered about Putnam's Values
>
> Hello everyone
>
> DMB wrote:
>
> An old Russian scholar once told me that if a person reads all of
> Dostoevsky's novels they don't need a bible.
>
> Hi David
>
> Here's our problem: we are all like that old Russian scholar as long
> as
> we stay locked into our comfortable intellectual patterns of value.
> Couldn't a bible scholar turn this argument around and say: if you
> read
> a bible, you don't need Dostoevsky? Think what each scholar is
> missing!
>
>
MOQ Online Homepage - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Unsubscribe - http://www.moq.org/md/index.html
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:13 BST