RE: ply to Grant

From: Grant Callaghan (
Date: Wed Feb 13 2002 - 00:06:54 GMT

  • Next message: Grant Callaghan: "RE: ply to Grant"

    Received: by id AAA16371 (8.6.9/5.3[ref] for from; Wed, 13 Feb 2002 00:12:30 GMT
    X-Originating-IP: []
    From: "Grant Callaghan" <>
    Subject: RE: ply to Grant
    Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 16:06:54 -0800
    Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed
    Message-ID: <>
    X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Feb 2002 00:06:54.0155 (UTC) FILETIME=[5802C9B0:01C1B422]
    Precedence: bulk

    >Subject: RE: ply to Grant
    >Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2002 16:35:10 -0000
    > <Vincent, correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the quote in
    >line one
    > > above is mine. But even if it was, what difference does a single word
    > > make
    > > in a long conversation? No one here is writing these snippets for
    > > publication -- I don't think. A lot of what is written is carelessly
    > > tossed around on the spur of the moment. Your objection to the use of
    > > "we" that may include you is duely noted and will be avoided by me in
    > > future. Does that solve the problem for you? I can't even remember what
    > > we were talking about when the incident occurred and it doesn't seem
    > > the
    > > effort of tracing it back to its beginnings.>
    > >
    > It wasn't that long ago, and we were talking about the "great"
    >innnovators and cultural change, based on your initial claim that those
    >innovators determined the cultures that followed in the wake of new
    >technologies. When I challenged this assertion you used the phrase 'we see
    >if differently' implying the you had the support of others. When I asked
    >exactly who you meant by 'we' you said, rather confusingly, you meant you
    >and I. Such things are particularly relevant if you're going to offer
    >appeals to authority to support your views, even in a discursive, non-peer
    >reviewed environment like this list. Still, I don't want to come across as
    >a pedant ('too late!' the gallery cries!) so if you don't want your just-so
    >stories about the wonders of global capitalism to be challenged, then we
    >agree to drop the subject.
    > Vincent

    Feel free to challenge. Lets just not waste a lot of time arguing over the
    pronouns. I don't look to authority to support my view. I often bring up
    the writing of others because that seems to be the preferred form here, but
    I stand by what I say entirely on my own. I have incorporated the views of
    others into my own world view, not to make it more right or better than
    someone else's, but because I liked the view and agreed with it. I don't
    mind that others might not. I don't expect their world view to be the same
    as mine. If someone can demonstrate that the view I have adopted is not as
    good as theirs, I'll change my view. I'm always endeavoring to improve my



    Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.

    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)

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Feb 13 2002 - 00:22:45 GMT