On Saturday, February 1, 2014 5:13:29 PM UTC, Edgar L. Owen wrote: > > Ghibbsa, > > Boy, you are really taking some giant leaps here! > > Just because I point out that a local present moment is obvious IN NO WAY > is a claim that that insight is original with me! That's a crazy inference. > > The fact is that 99.999% of everyone on earth throughout history has had > the same insight which they also knew was obvious. That in fact is one > reason it can be stated as obvious with such confidence. Because everyone > (expect a few who's heads are so deep in their physics books they can't > pull them out to look around at actual reality) observes it first hand in > their own experience every moment of their lives... > > All I can conclude is that your comment above was not objective but > unfortunately based on some personal antipathy... > > Edgar > I didn't mean and wasn't talking about ownership in that totally trivial and commonplace sense Edgar. I have more respect for anyone in a science list to assume they'd make a mistake that stupid, certainly including you. But are you showing me any reciprocal respect in the totally superficial way you are interpreting everything I am saying? I can assure you there's no antipathy. But may I point out these threads are littered with similar allegations from you to various others, in one form or another. And most of the rest have been pointing to more or less the same shortcoming that I now have to point to. You don't read anything carefully. You don't take arguments seriously. You don't entertain you might be wrong, or that someone else might have an important criticism for you that you need to hear. Your words might say different here and there, but in the thick of it, your behaviour says something else. Why didn't you respect me that I wouldn't be making such a stupid point as you think you own the present moment? Why didn't you respect Liz that she wouldn't be raising questions if she didn't think they were important problems your theory was facing? How do you think things work Edgar? Several other people too. And the rest clearly not respected in terms of the distinctive point they are trying to make being entertained properly by first you establishing, say by asking clarifying questions, what that distinctive point actually is. Why do you not entertain, that these paranoid allegations you are throwing out so often, have something to do with the pattern of superficial readings of other peoples contributions by you, despite these threads being even more littered with other people pointing this out, one way or another? What I just said to you, was pointing to what you are effectively DOING, not what you are explicitly believing. 'Ownership' is a metaphor in a context like this. I'm saying you are ASSUMING your conclusions have a similar obviousness - certainty - about them as the seed insights. You are doing that. In your words and vocabularly. In your responses to people, in that you Obviously feel your conclusions are so obvious or concrete, that any prolonged resistence must be poorly motivated one way or another. In the way you are reading what people have to say, that no more than intellectual skimming is necessary because....more obviousness. You are attaching obviousness through your reasoning and conclusions. Effectively you are doing that. That's a criticism Edgar. It isn't antipathy.
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
