TRTR(1) Eye Goddesses Wearing Dipthongs

[Erik T. Burns]

Paul wrote:

>But the fact that fewer people talk that way now certainly doesn't mean
that there are any fewer insincere people or errors in logic around than
>formerly.  It's just no longer in style to dwell on such things so much.

as the kids say these days, O RLY?

it seems to me that so often the Internet is just one big snarking "dwell on
the insincerity and illogic of my fellow man" machine.

Exhibit A: the Pynchon-l on pretty much any given day of the past decade.

it's fun if you can stand it.

On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 10:38 PM, Paul Mackin <mackin.paul at verizon.net>wrote:

> On 4/11/2011 5:08 PM, David Morris wrote:
>
>> It was your describing it as necesary that seemed a
>> post-rationalization.
>>
>
> Oh, OK, if that's a problem I modify my sentence to it was THOUGHT
> necessary.
>
> Just as it was thought necessary to send a bunch of new folks to Congress
> to straighten things out.
>
> Just as it will be thought necessary in a few years to send them all back
> home again.
>
> Doubt either event is necessary in an ontological sense.
>
> P
>
>
>
>   It wasn't by any means necesary.  It was the
>> victor in a power play.  The other contendors have mostly erased from
>> history.
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 3:49 PM, Paul Mackin<mackin.paul at verizon.net>
>>  wrote:
>>
>>> On 4/11/2011 3:46 PM, David Morris wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think your presentation here is a prime example of
>>>> post-rationalization.
>>>>
>>> Explaining why something occurred (or trying to explain it)  isn't the
>>> same as rationalization.
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20110411/185b39af/attachment.html>