[MD] Reading & Comprehension

[david buchanan]

dmb said to Bo:

...Pirsig refers to Quality (DQ) and the "pre-intellectual" reality. You repeatedly take this as a reference to social static patterns. Because they evolved prior to intellect, you figure, social patterns are "pre-intellectual".



Mary replies:
Dmb, I can't believe you just said that! ...Come on now.  That's a straw-man argument if I've ever heard one and does not further the conversation.  I'm enjoying this exchange, but you need to confine your objections to things Bo really said if you want to keep it productive. ...It's only fundamentally wrong when based upon your accusation above.  Since this is something Bo (and the rest of us) have never said, you can expect no argument.  We all see this as fundamentally wrong too and just kind of wonder how you managed to stray off into this fundamentally wrong area. Let's keep it real,

dmb says:

I've strayed off on a straw man? But I quoted Bo making this mistake. I caught him red-handed and included Bo's claim in his own words along with my comments. How can you possibly construe that as straw man or a wrong area? And why did you exclude Bo's quote from your objections? Why disappear the statement in dispute? That's sloppy at best and maybe even a bit dishonest, don't you think. Imagine the situation were reversed. How'd you like it if I deleted your evidence and dismissed your point as unfounded? Isn't that like taking a guys shoes and then laughing at him for being bare-footed? Might make a decent practical joke but it's no way to have a sincere conversation. 
 		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail has tools for the New Busy. Search, chat and e-mail from your inbox.
http://www.windowslive.com/campaign/thenewbusy?ocid=PID28326::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:WM_HMP:042010_1