On Jun 18, 2014, at 4:16 PM, Louis Talman <email@example.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 12:04:04 -0600, GS Chandy <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > >> OK, you will now claim that's not what you're saying... > > One of the undeniable benefits of habitual imprecision is that those who are > so habituated can always deny, with a measure of plausibility, that what they > have actually said is something other than what they really meant---even > when what they have said is very close to what they did mean but will never > admit.
This notion, that I somehow frame things deliberately to confuse you and GS is absurd. No one has ever thought of me as a guy that doesn?t want my ideas to come across. If anything, they feel sometimes that I want only my ideas to come across. So I ask you, how is it an advantage for me to say things that confuse the two of you? Why would I want to deny something? I have thoughts, I put those thoughts to words, like anyone else, and If they don?t come across, then do like anyone else, ask me what I meant. I am not trying to play mind games on you two. I take my opinions too serious to waste the time with this absurd notion you put forth.
> > But, much as they deny it, what they do say is a very accurate reflection of > the way they think. Lack of precision in our use of language always reflects > our lack of precision in thinking, just as lack of precision in thinking > exhibits itself in our use of language.
It isn?t imprecision in language, it is just that the thoughts are too much for you to get right away. I get that. You don?t have a lot of experience thinking about these things at this level. You don?t partake of these conversations except once every blue moon. Of course you are going to be unprepared to keep up, but all you have to do is ask for clarification.