[MD] Definitions.

[david buchanan]

Marsha said to dmb:
I do not have a negative stance toward static intellectual quality, and never have had a negative stance towards any static quality, and I have not suggested one abandon reason, only know its real limitations I have never suggested concepts or language was a "contemptible prison".

Then, just a little while later, Marsha totally contradicted her own denial:
Marsha said to dmb:

Oh, you want something addressing definitions.  Try this: "... The definition is a cage...  You set limits on what a word is.  You set limits on what your experience is.  And those limits, which you set in order that you can manipulate these words, are also a cage for that word.  It can't go beyond it one way or another."

dmb says:
See, you deny the view that language is a prison and then quote Pirsig using the image of a cage as an analogy for words. 

Prison is just a certain kind of cage, of course, so you've just contradicted your own denial AND you've inadvertently confirmed my accusations of anti-intellectualism.

I wish you had the decency to at least be embarrassed by this kind of contradictory nonsense. It seems as thought you really don't care at all about coherence, consistency, or intellectual honesty. You'll just say anything to avoid that, huh?