From: "Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx" Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx >McEvoy comments: "What then would be most interesting - indeed vital - to know is what these Nazi readers were making of, and taking from, Kant. Unfortunately Chris' very interesting post does not answer this." Following McEvoy's vein of asking, "isn't the implicature here...?" with a gloss of the explicature, instead, I would grant that since the post was never ASKED to answer this, it is not surprise that it does. "The post does not answer..." implicates that it was asked, and it wasn't.> It "implicates" no such thing. The Bible doesn't answer how variation-cum-heredity could explain evolution in terms of adaptations favoured by natural selection [or how such an explanation can be reconciled with a Creator-God], but this does not "implicate" that "it was asked" or that it raised such questions. All it means is that if such questions are raised, the Bible does not provide an answer. >But the topic of literary influences of wars is a fascinating one. >Take for example some people's favourite war, "The Great War", as they call it:> Odd: despite the many conversations that turn on one's "favourite" this or "favourite" that, I've yet to encounter one on one's "favourite war". (But surely the Peloponesian, the Hundred Years, the Crimean, the Falklands and the one "On Drugs" are all higher up the list of favourites than the Great War?) D