Karl, good news ...
You said "It is quite clear that we have different standards of what
constitutes a reasoned argument and knowledge."
As I have been trying to say; so glad you agree.
This is our stumbling point, in "me giving you straight answers to not
quite so straightforward questions". I'm answering the questions, but
not on a basis you recognise as valid. I call that progress ;-) (Much
better than the did / didn't garbage)
The subject of this board is wisdom (& values) as an alternative to
more traditional forms reason and knowledge.
Intelligent life Jim, but not as we know it ;-)
Ian
On 3/2/07, Karl Rogers <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Ian,
>
> I didn't call you a liar. I simply suggested that you did not know what you
> are talking about.
> You would only be a liar if you knew that. I suspect that you don't.
>
> It is quite clear that we have different standards of what constitutes a
> reasoned argument and knowledge.
>
> Let's not waste anymore of each others' time. Unless you are willing or able
> to explain and justify your assertion that it is a fact that not all
> people's vote need to have equal value then it is pointless to continue this
> "discussion".
>
> Karl.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> New Yahoo! Mail is the ultimate force in competitive emailing. Find out more
> at the Yahoo! Mail Championships. Plus: play games and win prizes.
>
>
|