I wrote:
"I do not believe -- and I think I have good reasons for not believing -- ...
that anyone recently quit this list because s/he was sick of my method of
argument ...."
Jerry's and Michael Williams's recent posts have addressed a number of issues,
but they have not addressed this one. I continue not to believe that Michael
quit this list for the above-stated reason. Why not? Because I do not
believe he quit the list. He may have unsubscribed from one address, but I
have reasons (including a report from listproc) for thinking that he has
remained subscribed at one or more other address(es).
In response to the paragraph in which the above quote appears:
> Moreover, I DO NOT BELIEVE that what we've been told is true. That is,
> I do not believe -- and I think I have good reasons for not believing
> -- either that anyone recently quit this list because s/he was sick of
> my method of argument, or that anyone told this to Jerry.
> Until such time as evidence to the contrary is made public, I suggest that
> other listmembers also exercise a healthy dose of disbelief.
Jerry has replied: "Translation: Andrew is saying that I am a liar."
It is a shame that Jerry, who seems so concerned with getting the definition
of "widget" right, is not equally concerned with getting the definition of
"liar" right. According to _Webster's New Universal Unabridged Dictionary_,
2d ed., the definition of "liar" is
"a person who tells lies; one who declares to another as a fact what he KNOWS
to be untrue, with the INTENTION to deceive him" (emphases added).
I therefore did not say that Jerry was a liar, because I did not say that he
KNEW his declaration to be untrue, or that his INTENTION was to deceive. I
did not say these things because I did not and do not think they were true.
Nonetheless, I believe that Jerry's report was at variance with what Michael
Williams wrote to him. It was, at minimum, not the whole truth and,
therefore, it was misleading. I think that Michael's recent post on the
matter confirms this.
On a related matter, Alejandro recently asked Jerry an important question to
which Jerry has not yet responded. The question was
"Coming to our original point, I''m noting that you [Jerry Levy] are not
longer insisting in the idea that in Andrew''s example 'the Sun creates
value'. Am I right?"
As I have already noted, I too am interested in learning Jerry's answer to
this question.
(Why is this a related matter? Answer: it concerns the "method[s] of
argument" of those involved in this dispute.)
Ciao
Andrew Kliman