From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!uchinews!tartarus.uchicago.edu!owens Wed Apr 22 12:04:27 EDT 1992
Article 5185 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Xref: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca sci.philosophy.tech:2579 comp.ai.philosophy:5185
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!uchinews!tartarus.uchicago.edu!owens
>From: owens@tartarus.uchicago.edu (Christopher Owens)
Newsgroups: sci.philosophy.tech,comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: Writing and Responsibility (was re: "revisiting"+false dichotomies)
Message-ID: <owens.703893909@tartarus.uchicago.edu>
Date: 21 Apr 92 22:05:09 GMT
References: <kuhekbINNdbc@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> <1992Apr13.011832.11030@husc3.harvard.edu> <owens.703192469@tartarus.uchicago.edu> <1992Apr17.123829.11218@husc3.harvard.edu>
Sender: news@uchinews.uchicago.edu (News System)
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Lines: 28

In <1992Apr17.123829.11218@husc3.harvard.edu> zeleny@brauer.harvard.edu (Mikhail Zeleny) writes:

> Worse, your demand is that I accomodate every "genuinely interested
> person" who has the misfortune to misunderstand my argument.  Now,
> that simply won't do.

Nobody's under any obligation to accomodate anybody.

I, too, think it's mighty annoying when people who haven't done their
homework want to endlessly and naively retread well-worn ground.  And
if you want to publicly slap such people around, then suit yourself.
But spare us the claim that you are "trying to remedy [anybody's]
misapprehension of philosophical issues."

> As a writer, I address myself only to those capable of understanding
> my arguments;

Well, this admits of degrees. I'm scared that 'round yonder
solipsistic corner lurks a crotchety senescence, full of lonely days
spent bitterly cursing and railing at a world filled with fools who
cannot understand the genius of our work.

> [...] To take an exotic example, [...] differences between the
> ideology of the XIXth century French republicanism, and the program
> of the American Republican Party [...]

Your point is taken.  For example, "19th" or "nineteenth" would be
pandering at its worst.


