Thanks for the correction. Where would we be without you?
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@...> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "feste37" <feste37@> wrote:
> >
> > You're a beguiling guy, MZ, a seducer, a lover, a Minotaur,
> > no less, luring the unsuspecting into your labyrinth of
> > delicious words. It was post no. 281584 you recall.
>
> Actually it was post no. 281378. Terrific post, and a great
> exchange with MZ.
>
>
>
>
> > Reading your posts just after your arrival here stimulated me actually to
> > write something thoughtful that was longer than two sentences. No, I do not
> > see you as dogmatic but as someone who rides gigantic tidal waves of
> > "feeling intellect" (the phrase is not mine but Wordsworth's) wherever they
> > happen to go and then proclaims the truth as it appears to you from
> > whatever metaphysical beachhead you find yourself newly occupying. Before
> > the next tidal wave comes . . . "Old men should be explorers," wrote Yeats,
> > and, although we are surely not yet old, Yeats was also, surely, right.
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, maskedzebra <no_reply@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Dear Feste37: Don't listen to Judy: she is just having fun. She is not
> > > serious. Don't believe a word she says. And by the way, *this* post of
> > > yours outdoes them all. Are you not afraid your steeping yourself in this
> > > artIronymight take away some of that purity and innocence which was so
> > > much the signature of you when I first responded to you? Thenmany months
> > > agoyou convinced me of the validity of the marriage of East and
> > > Westsomething I would not have thought possible up to that moment. This
> > > is one of those first person ontology meets third person ontology (The
> > > omnisubjectivity of the Personal God and the pure consciousness of the
> > > Impersonal God) coincidencesembodied in the context of your post (from
> > > waybackwhenJuly of 2011?). I carry the memory of that event. Because it
> > > tended to suggest I was being a little dogmatic. Remember that?
>
