Greetings,
I'm bringing this up as a point of order because I genuinely believe DMB should not be allowed to
behave in the way he does. It debases the whole forum and, I suggest, should not be tolerated. I
refer you to my posting from 10-09-99 and David's reply from 12-10-99 for a prime example of what I
am talking about.
David; I have never said that I am a philosophy professor, and I see no reason for you to lie about
such things. I very rarely respond to you, simply because you demonstrably thrive on complete
misrepresentation, and always re-invent others' positions to suit yourself. Thus I keep my response
short and resent having to correct your distortion of my own position at every turn.
I did not say that empiricism is not based on sense experience, I said it does not solely allow for
biological sense experience. An example, to answer your badly phrased and distorting questions (see
my last sentence if you can't understand why) is the empirical experience of consciousness which
very few (or possibly no) empiricists would deny.
Please do disagree with me, but cut the dishonesty, misrepresentation and lies.
LIE 1: "he tells us he's a Philosophy professor" I did? When? Quote me directly.
MISQUOTE 1: "Struan's assertion that mainstream Empiricism is based on something other than the
senses." I did not assert anything of the sort. Show me where David. Go on, quote me directly.
MISQUOTE 2: "..the specific accusation that mainstream empiricists admit verifiability by the
biological senses, is quite wrong and Platt's critique is misplaced" I did not write that David. I
wrote: "the specific accusation that mainstream empiricists (John?) admit only to verifiability by
the biological senses, is quite wrong and Platt's critique is misplaced." They mean two entirely
different things. One is utterly stupid, the other correct.
DISTORTION 1: "I'd say Locke's statement is an epistemological claim, not a metaphysical
formulation, as Struan says." I did not say that. I said that Locke formulated empiricism as a
metaphysical position and used his statement as an addition to that point. (but, as you say, this is
not important)
I invite you to retract your comments David and suggest that you learn how to read what people say,
not what you think it would be easy to refute. Your lack of integrity and thought does you no credit
and I shouldn't have to waste time writing e-mails such as this.
Is this sort of thing against the rules Horse? I would have thought it should be incumbent upon
every member to check that they quote others accurately at the very least.
Struan
------------------------------------------
Struan Hellier
< mailto:struan@clara.co.uk>
"All our best activities involve desires which are disciplined and
purified in the process."
(Iris Murdoch)
MOQ Online Homepage - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Unsubscribe - http://www.moq.org/md/index.html
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:11 BST