I'd be up for the exercise providing one side kept from telling the other side exactly what it is they think (or exactly what the other side thinks they think). If we can eliminate this exercise (which usually takes up a good third to a half of the discussion) I'm sure we could whittle away the relevant facts enough to get to the heartwood.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric Yost" <eyost1132@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 8:11 PM Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: The Strident Voice of Defeat
Andy to Lawrence: The difference between us is that your way to deal with it is to deny it, my way is to look at it. That might be the difference between right and left.Eric: If that were true, it would be so flattering to one side and so humbling to the other. One side gets a pat on the back, the other a ruler to the knuckles. Ah, the simplicity of it all!If we could debate one issue at a time and resolve it, decide which position is most consistent with what we all know, vote on it in good faith and settle it in good faith, then move on to the next issue ... we might make progress.It would take lots of mental energy, lots of discipline, mutual good will, and open minds. In my opinion, the hardest thing for this List would be the discipline part, summoning the discipline to stick to a long project and summoning the discipline to avoid the easy kneejerk responses.____Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws.- Friedrich Nietzsche,"Thus Spoke Zarathustra" ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
