That's OK then, they can be in their league all on their own, they probably
won't even want associate membership of our club. Of course, they might say
that they wouldn't want to join any club that would admit them - but we
would surely admit them, if only to prove that we are the real contrary
ones.
--
Piers
-----Original Message-----
From: olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Richard Lovison
Sent: 01 March 2007 12:35
To: olympus@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [OM] Re: Did it again!
Oh my, in my initial silliness I didn't realize what I was getting myself
into. Andrew and Moose... you are definitely in a league all your own. :)
Richard L
On 3/1/07, Andrew Fildes <afildes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 01/03/2007, at 5:09 PM, Moose wrote:
>
> >> To be contrary would be to have a particular disposition, a
> >> tendency to disagree with any particular suggestion or instruction.
> > And absent any particular suggestion or instruction, there is no
> > contrariness. No object, no action. We could have a nice existential
> > discussion about latent, as opposed to active, contrary behavior,
> > but I don't think that would fit in with your next topic. :-)
>
> A 'disposition' is the potential to act in a particular way.
> Existential definitions of latent behaviours? - oh I love it when you
> talk dirty! Given that existentialism is about choices made, latency
> would seem to me to be irrelevant except in rather archaic concepts of
> will.
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|