Re: Objects and Relations
From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 21:38:15 GMT
Message-ID: <bFryh.3710$R71.56071_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
>
> It was neutral so take it how you see fit. I was inferring that not
> many on cdt would entertain such wishy-washy pseudo-philosophical
> discussion as that which I've been partaking in.
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2007 21:38:15 GMT
Message-ID: <bFryh.3710$R71.56071_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
JOG wrote:
> On Feb 6, 8:45 pm, Gene Wirchenko <g..._at_ocis.net> wrote:
>
>>"JOG" <j..._at_cs.nott.ac.uk> wrote: >> >>[snip] >> >>>Fair enough, but I don't really care if your a platonist, a >>>reductionist, a mereological nihilist or a senior gynaecologist (and >>>trust me compared to practicitioners like Gene and Marshall, I'm >>>positively wooly). A philosophy is only worth its salt here if it has >>>practical positive impact. >> >> This is somewhat opaque. Are Marshall and I being complimented, >>insulted, or merely mentioned?
>
> It was neutral so take it how you see fit. I was inferring that not
> many on cdt would entertain such wishy-washy pseudo-philosophical
> discussion as that which I've been partaking in.
Have you considered why that might be?
> Hmm, in the fullness of hindsight, that's looking more and more like a
> compliment.
Received on Wed Feb 07 2007 - 22:38:15 CET