Re: Objects and Relations
From: paul c <toledobythesea_at_oohay.ac>
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 01:52:16 GMT
Message-ID: <kp7Ch.1042051$5R2.554381_at_pd7urf3no>
>>Cimode wrote:
>>
>>
>>>While I agree with the general thematics guiding the above description
>>>of RM vs OO, I would like to draw your attention on the danger of
>>>locking up RM in an elitist bias.
>>>...
>>
>>It's the savages who should be locked up, not the RM which needs to be
>>protected from being mangled by them. Nothing wrong with intelligent bias.
>>
>>p
>
> *savages*? Is there a need for such etymology from another time?
Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2007 01:52:16 GMT
Message-ID: <kp7Ch.1042051$5R2.554381_at_pd7urf3no>
Cimode wrote:
> On 18 fév, 19:01, paul c <toledobythe..._at_oohay.ac> wrote: >
>>Cimode wrote:
>>
>>
>>>While I agree with the general thematics guiding the above description
>>>of RM vs OO, I would like to draw your attention on the danger of
>>>locking up RM in an elitist bias.
>>>...
>>
>>It's the savages who should be locked up, not the RM which needs to be
>>protected from being mangled by them. Nothing wrong with intelligent bias.
>>
>>p
>
> *savages*? Is there a need for such etymology from another time?
sure there is when there is so much unnecessary overkill here.
p Received on Mon Feb 19 2007 - 02:52:16 CET