From: Gordon Mohr (email@example.com)
Date: Thu Aug 17 2000 - 23:23:51 PDT
I coined the term to highlight the irreconcilable differences in our
values and expectations about the discussion.
If you think trotting out the idea of virtual reality simulacra of
dead parents is a clever way to illustrate that money really *can*
buy anything, there is too great a gap in our values to make the
topic worth discussing with you.
If you think it's good to "clean up your act" by stating your
proposition cleanly and concisely, and then, upon further
reflection, announce 3 hours later that yes, your "proper
formulation" is in fact tautologically worthless, then you're
playing some game with yourself that is inscrutable to me and
I'd best stay out of.
I value consistency of position, vocabulary, and context; you
enjoy varying each as much as possible -- "intellectual
contortions" was your term. I find that undermines the entire
purpose of the discussion, which is, in my mind, establishing
some common truths to build from.
I thus don't like your game, please play it with someone else.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Aug 17 2000 - 23:28:33 PDT