RE: ....and the beat goes on and on and on...

From: Joe E. Dees (joedees@bellsouth.net)
Date: Fri Jan 19 2001 - 12:04:19 GMT

  • Next message: Vincent Campbell: "RE: ....and the beat goes on and on and on..."

    Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id MAA03761 (8.6.9/5.3[ref pg@gmsl.co.uk] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk); Fri, 19 Jan 2001 12:23:35 GMT
    Message-Id: <200101191221.HAA10278@mail6.lig.bellsouth.net>
    From: "Joe E. Dees" <joedees@bellsouth.net>
    To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 06:04:19 -0600
    Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
    Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
    Subject: RE: ....and the beat goes on and on and on...
    In-reply-to: <LPBBICPHCJJBPJGHGMCIKEOBCMAA.ddiamond@ozemail.com.au>
    References: <200101191145.GAA01874@mail1.lig.bellsouth.net>
    X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v3.01b)
    Sender: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    Precedence: bulk
    Reply-To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    

    From: "Chris Lofting" <ddiamond@ozemail.com.au>
    To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    Subject: RE: ....and the beat goes on and on and on...
    Date sent: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 23:17:05 +1100
    Send reply to: memetics@mmu.ac.uk

    >
    >
    > > -----Original Message-----
    > > From: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk [mailto:fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk]On Behalf
    > > Of Joe E. Dees
    > > Sent: Friday, 19 January 2001 10:25
    > > To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    > > Subject: RE: ....and the beat goes on and on and on...
    > >
    > >
    > > From: "Chris Lofting" <ddiamond@ozemail.com.au>
    > > To: <memetics@mmu.ac.uk>
    > > Subject: RE: ....and the beat goes on and on and on...
    > > Date sent: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 22:18:17 +1100
    > > Send reply to: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    > >
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > > -----Original Message-----
    > > > > From: fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk
    > > [mailto:fmb-majordomo@mmu.ac.uk]On Behalf
    > > > > Of Joe E. Dees
    > > > > Sent: Friday, 19 January 2001 8:22
    > > > > To: memetics@mmu.ac.uk
    > > > > Subject: RE: ....and the beat goes on and on and on...
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > >
    > > > > I should know it is impossible to instruct the brainless
    > > (sigh), but I'll
    > > > > try again...
    > > > > WHAT IS NOT deals with what cannot happen in the present.
    > > > > WHAT COULD HAVE BEEN deals with what might have happened
    > > > > in the past.
    > > > > WHAT COULD BE deals with what might still happen in the future.
    > > > > As the first term, WHAT IS NOT, possesses a negative not found
    > > > > in WHAT COULD HAVE BEEN and WHAT COULD BE, they do
    > > > > not correlate as isomorphic expressions in differing time contexts;
    > > > > WHAT MAY or MIGHT (now) BE IS THEIR LOGICAL
    > > > > COMPLEMENT.
    > > > >
    > > >
    > > > Oh is *THAT* what you are raving about, symmetry! 1:1 ness!.
    > > God, Joe took
    > > > you a while to get that across. Ok I get you now but you are
    > > sort of 'wrong'
    > > > :-) In my writing the emphasis of the NOT deals with an
    > > additional cognitive
    > > > process, namely the use of identifying something by its
    > > negation (if you go
    > > > through my material there is an emphasis on 1:many etc and cognitive
    > > > processes ..).
    > > >
    > > > Hmm..I think the 'problem' in our communications is you try to
    > > come from a
    > > > more logical perspective (or assume mine is 'pure' logic)
    > > whereas in fact I
    > > > have always come from a cognitive perspective. (and so my emphasis on
    > > > neurology/senses etc 1:many etc etc etc, you try to work within, I work
    > > > across).
    > > >
    > > I need read no further. Once you have renounced logic, you lose
    > > the ability to argue for or against anything, since all argument
    > > proceeds logically. I have long suspected you of knowing how
    > > illogical and nonsensical you are; I never expected you to actually
    > > admit same. However, now that you have rendered yourself
    > > publicly unabledue to lack of logical tools, to distinguish truth from
    > > falsehood, or to discern either validity or soundness, or the
    > > absence of either, you are revealed to be absolutely useless to any
    > > rational pursuits.
    >
    > Joe, you lack imagination. You are so rigid, so ALL or NOTHING, so literal
    > minded. so LIMITED. Get some help.
    >
    Of course you refuse to be "limited"by logic, reason, rationality,
    coherence or cogency. Those very "freedoms" from such essential
    cognitive tools actually prevent you from going anywhere but in
    small and meaningless circles.
    >
    >
    > ===============================================================
    > This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    > Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    > For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    > see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
    >
    >

    ===============================================================
    This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
    Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
    For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
    see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jan 19 2001 - 12:25:25 GMT