Ken, my unreserved apology. I have allowed my mischievous sense of play to get in the way of a serious scholarly matter. I accept that from an academic research point of view, peer reviewed papers are to be taken seriously. Sorry.
On a related matter, I have been instructed, on pain of excommunication, and worse (what could be worse to someone interested in communication!) by my superior colleague and inquisitor (who also happens to be She-Who-Must-Be-Obeyed) that I must on no account, now nor in the future, refer to our joint paper on Communication Boundaries as about "an aspect of Galileo's trial" The true and only interpretation of the said paper relegates the Galileo trial to that of a mere example—a sparkling bauble to help enlighten and illuminate the readers' path to an understanding of the true nature of communication. Failure to recant from my transgression will result in excommunication, house arrest, and denial of access to the music of the heavenly spheres that is the internet.
Thus I herby recant! My view of the said paper was a grievous error of judgement and heresy and I abjure, curse, and detest the aforesaid errors and heresies. I altogether abandon the false opinion that the Galileo Trial is the center of the said paper and immovable, and that the theory of communication is not the centre of the paper, and moves, and that I must not hold, defend, or teach in any way whatsoever, verbally or in writing, the said false doctrine, and after it had been notified to me that the said doctrine was contrary to Holy Semiotica.
David
(and yet, I'm 'moved' by the Trial)
|