[Wittrs] Re: Original and derived intentionality
- From: "jrstern" <jrstern@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: wittrsamr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2009 03:30:19 -0000
--- In Wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "iro3isdx" <xznwrjnk-evca@...> wrote:
>
>
> > All I see above is, "We monitor our inputs", but that doesn't
> > sound like a show-stopper for even simple machines.
>
> I'm not sure why that's all you see, since I thought I was explicitly
> disagreeing with the viewpoint that expresses.
Good grief, how explicit must I be here, or how argumentative are you
attempting to me?
You are asserting that "We monitor our inputs" is one *part* of your
viewpoint, right? If not, I have trouble understanding why you wrote
it.
And you are taking me to task for saying "all I see" about the one
point, even though I address one or two of the other *parts* in
order to dismiss them?
Unless you are asserting there is some relationship between the
various points you raised which forbids them from being taken
separately. And I suppose you might be, but if so, please make it
explicit. I don't generally cotton to holistic arguments, but
perhaps this would be the first.
Josh
=========================================
Manage Your AMR subscription: //www.freelists.org/list/wittrsamr
For all your Wittrs needs: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/
Other related posts:
