Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 14:53:24 -0800 (PST)
From: Michael Rooney <rooney-AT-tiger.cc.oxy.edu>
Subject: Re: God help us, back to tropes




On Tue, 26 Jan 1999, Matthew King wrote:

> > > In both cases, though, the answer is in the showing, not in the telling.
> > > Jumping from rock to rock *sounds* stupid, but it feels great.  
> > 
> > Just because some things can be shown but not
> > said does not mean that all saying is useless
> > or inapplicable.
> 
> Who said it was?

I didn't say you did.  But you did include
politics in the showing category, and thus 
my comment:

> > This is particularly true of
> > politics, where lots of things feel great to
> > some but not-so-great to others.  
> 
> Nobody is telling you to jump from rock to rock. 

But merely "showing", say, the poor off
of welfare is an insufficient approach to
politics.


> > > Arguing
> > > with Rooney et al. is either an amusement or a mistake.  For every answer,
> > > they produce a new question.  The skeptical parrhesiast is always on the
> > > offensive, never satisfied!
> > 
> > That's Jagger, not Socrates.
> 
> Notice that when the going gets tough, Rooney, like Socrates, tends to
> side-step.  The parrhesiast is constitutionally incapable of taking a
> straight step forward.  

And when the sophist gets going, the bull
really starts to fly.  N.b. the implicit
self-aggrandizement of the going "getting
tough".  

Would you like a straight (how heterosexist!)
step forward?  Your claims above are false,
so obviously so that a joke is an appropriate
response.  Are you satisfied now?
 

Cordially,

M.