| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Ethics, second position, and abstraction |
| Posted by: | Amilcar |
| Date/Time: | 06/05/2004 13:58:59 |
|
I would like to comment about (hehe) a few items in your post, assumptions i suppose. Relevance: While my post was not relevant to the content of your post, it was a comment about the frequency and depth and range of your postings. I would offer that my post was relevant as a response to the higher-level pattern of the frequency of your postings and irrelevant to the content of your one post: ethics, abstractions and second position. Is it unethical for me to 'judge' that i think you should be spending your time doing something besides posting. Is it 'wrong' for me to think that these other activities may characteristically be less prone to abstraction and second-order thinking as they are use sensory-based skills (juggling, etc)? And is it 'wrong' for me to wish for you a more varied and, gasp-dare i say, richer experience? Victims: I'd rather let you fill in the lost performatives, Who is a victim of what? Who was the victimizer? Are you the victim and i the victimizer? What offense have i perpetrated? I just suggested another few courses of actions (in an innocent-sounding placating voice). What crime [2] have i committed, and what consequences are there? The reason that [3] isn't relevant is that there is no 'objective' governing body that mediates disagreements, disputes and defines crimes. So basically this victimhood and crime (i'm a criminal eh?) framework is built on quicksand, a cacaphony, a fleeting feeling and a mockery of justice [for a few multi-sensory metaphors]. So i pose in proper: What offense or crime hath i commited against you that lead you to interpret that you could think of yourself as a victim? Amilcar ps: by whose standards does Ms. Grovier achieve import? |