Re: No exceptions?

From: Jon Heggland <jon.heggland_at_idi.ntnu.no>
Date: Tue, 04 Jul 2006 11:04:39 +0200
Message-ID: <e8dard$bra$1@orkan.itea.ntnu.no>

Erwin wrote:

>>> If you don't agree to go by
>>> Date's definitions, then don't argue with anyone who does.
>> Why on earth not? Firstly, I don't contradict Date, and secondly, any
>> hypothetical disagreement with Date does not disqualify me from the
>> discussion.

>
> The point I was trying to make is that agreement on the precise meaning
> of the terms is *prerequisite* to any form of argument. I was *not*
> trying to make you shut up. I was trying to prevent people talking
> past one another.

Fair enough; my interpretation of your statement may have been less than charitable.

> That said, it might also be useful to point out that the complete set
> of Date's writings span a period of over twenty years, years during
> which of course insights have evolved. He quite often uses the phrase
> "this chapter is to be considered as superseding anything I have
> written on this subject before", or something of that nature. Quoting
> the older books is therefore often a somewhat iffy proposition.

Precisely my point. Or one of them, at least.

-- 
Jon

Received on Tue Jul 04 2006 - 04:04:39 CDT