[lit-ideas] Welch Help (was French Help [was Re: Willie Pete])

  • From: "Henninge, Richard" <henninri@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 02:13:18 +0100

Judy clears this up totally, and I humbly proffer to all abused a blanket 
apology for transgressions occurring during my mistakenness. I had made the 
mistake of trying to interpret Mike Chase's comment completely out of context. 
The discussion is in fact much more clear-cut than I first understood it to be 
(my bad), and that is in no small part due to the clarity, in particular, of 
Mike's arguments and Phil's characterizations ("M. Chase's moral equivalency 
argument"). 
 
Let me now step back out to where I can better mind my own business (thanx 
anyways, Mr. Geary).
 
Richard Henninge
University of Mainz (his own business)  

________________________________

Von: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx im Auftrag von Judy Evans
Gesendet: Fr 11.11.2005 01:30
An: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Betreff: [lit-ideas] Re: French Help (was Re: Willie Pete)



I thought I understood Mike (Chase) easily; I read it as
(I mangle)

"If my "moral equivalency argument" were troubling enough (to Enns and
Yost) to awaken them (E and Y) from..."

the clue's in the prior

PE(EY?)> What is troubling is M. Chase's moral equivalency argument that
> regularly rears its ugly head.

nothing Frenchified about the reply

MC>I'm delighted that it's troubling. If it were troubling enough to
>awaken P. Enns and E. Yoist from the dogmatic slumber of their jingoist
>self-satisfaction, I'd be even happier.

hope that helps


--
Judy Evans, Cardiff, UK

                           mailto:judithevans1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html


Other related posts: