Re: internal dialogue : oops
- Subject: Re: internal dialogue : oops
- From: Jeff Oliver <jefolivr@newton.dialix.com.au>
- Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 07:05:50 +0800 (WST)
- In-Reply-To: <199610132115.HAA16178@clothes.peg.apc.org>
On Sun, 13 Oct 1996, critter wrote:
> "We don't even understand the nature of words and how they arrive, so a
> discussion about how we think without words is quite a bit of nonsense.
> Wilbur"
>
> well, allrighty then! :)
Oops - I have to take some of the responsibility for this!
I can't speak for Wilbur & I know that 'bit of a nonsense'
could be a provocative comment.
Someone nicely expressed how refreshing it is to read the
QH experiential accounts, and that they reflect a willingness
to be seen.
I remember being a bit surprised to realise that 'nonsense'
has a very different meaning from 'a load of old cods'.
I guess that if I'd been a bit more explicit about the
question of early language I would have expressed a
(potentially stifling) apprehension about the conversation
shifting from empirical exploration (NLP?) to armchair
psychology - a bit like the number of angels on the head of
a pin.
Sometimes responses can seem a bit sharper than they were
intended.
Be encoraged, especially with 17 days to go till WORLD LURKERS' DAY!
Jeff