Re: General Resolution: Removing non-free
On Fri, Jun 09, 2000 at 02:24:46AM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> Craig Sanders <cas@taz.net.au> writes:
>
> > On Fri, Jun 09, 2000 at 01:32:20AM -0500, John Goerzen wrote:
> > > > yes, go ahead and chop out the line "there is a difference" which
> > > > makes the point. i'll repeat it because you seem to want to ignore
> > > > it: there is a difference between ignoring something (passive
> > > > discrimination at worst), and active discrimination.
> > >
> > > Because it's not relevant. You still have to choose what to ignore,
> > > and that choice requires discrimination.
> >
> > you persist in deliberately using a different meaning of the word
>
> Despite your best efforts at justifying your failed argument by
> inventing new meanings for words, I'm not being fooled.
> Discrimination has a very clear meaning in logic, one that is easily
> defined and not easily ignored.
look, just read a fucking dictionary and shut up about it. you will see
that, wonder of wonders, "discriminate" actually has several meanings
and several different contexts in which it can be used.
really. truly. it's a fact.
craig
ps: you also have a bad habit of chopping off quotes at a point which
erases your opponent's point. this may be useful in that it lets you
ignore the point or invent your own straw-man, but it's really very poor
form. transparent, too.
--
craig sanders
Reply to: