Re: my email address


"Perplexed in Peoria" <jimmenegay@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:d9utnk$2b1j$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> "Peter F" <notdisclosed@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:d9uocj$28st$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> "Perplexed in Peoria" <jimmenegay@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:d9tb6j$1qt3$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >
>> > "Peter F" <notdisclosed@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:d9rsn0$1a90$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > > "g" <gillawton@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> > > news:d9qdb1$qot$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > > > INVITATION TO INTERESTED
>> > > > PARTICIPATION IN A TEAM EFFORT:
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > > I tentatively like your (entire) idea.
>> > >
>> >
>> > Werner Heisenberg might disapprove of my calling attention to this,
>> > but ...
>> >
>> > May I point out that even as Morse and Wilkins are discussing
>> > isolation mechanisms and their status as adaptations on another
>> > thread, we seem to have such a process unfolding before our eyes
>> > right here.
>> >
>> > Moreover, the participants are providing reports of their own
>> > motivations for us to examine. Fascinating.
>> >
>> >
>>
>> This is great!
>> Not only am I my own EPT enthusiast, but now I also have become a species
>> under Perplexed('s) scrutiny - of as well!!
>> %-}
>
> Well, actually no. I personally can't bear to watch the process myself.
> AEvasive of me, no? But I did think that Morse, Wilkins, et. al. might
> be interested. ;-)
>
> Keep up the good work, Peter. I particularly liked your statement on
> another thread:
>
> I am afraid I cannot easily abide by expressed attitudes/statements that
> has the effect of hiding something important -- EVEN if what is being
> hidden
> is hideous and hyper-demotivating to the declarator. ;-|
>
> If I were to become so tactful that I would take no action that
> might rattle or wreck any AEVASIVEly acquired personality across
> the Internet - then I would not dare to put across any EPT view and
> opinion at all.
>
> Yet I notice that your observations are so couched in private jargon
> that there is little risk that your typical subject will become hyper-
> demotivated. Translating your ideas into plain English is so difficult
> that most people have stopped attempting to do so. So, perhaps you
> are really being tactful after all. ;-)

Let me make a comment I believe Albert Einstein might whole-heartedly
agree with me on, even if one member of sbe might consider that to be
comparing myself to him... hardy har har har... (Jacky Gleason)...

The two most valuable attributes of the words and formulas of a scientist
are transparency and confirmability. (No... not conformability,
conFiRMability. Even if it is wrong in the anguished eyes of a purist, its
meaning is abundantly clear.) (It was Richard Nixon who said "abundantly
clear," but I usurped it here.)

Anyhow, nobody had to WONDER about what Dr. Einstein said, or what
he meant. It was clear. And if one did not like it he was welcome to
disprove it. And many of those crystal clear assertions have stood up to
efforts to disprove them.

Please do not say, "I knew that," unless you would have at least one
member of sbe say you are comparing yourself to George Jefferson. (:>)

For poets, perhaps, the opposite is true. Thomas Stearns Eliot once said,
in response to the remarks of a critic about some of his more abstruse
passages, "When I would be very fine, sometimes I do not know, myself,
what I would mean."


g





.

Quantcast