Re: Loop approach: Loop as effect

[jim palmer <jimp@pobox.com>]

it seems to me that you are trying to stretch the meaning of the word 
"instrument."
why would you want to do that?

distinction blurs are common in concepts of sufficient complexity.
i think they are even necessary.
remember that in the center of yang is yin (and vis versa).

it does bother me the way the word "valid" is thrown around.
people should maybe be required by law to make some study of 
logic before they are allowed to use it...

is it meat or is it cake? -george carlin

> At 01:09 AM 7/23/2002, Stuart Wyatt wrote:
> >Saying that, its been funny sitting back and reading the responses ;) 
> ><evil grin>
> 
> I agree, even though I was writing some of them. it sure is easy to push 
> some people's buttons.
> 
> One thing I observed that I though was really odd: Why do people have 
>such 
> a desire to broaden the definition of words? If the definitions of words 
> all overlap to the point where they lose their individual meaning and 
> become interchangeable, you lose your ability to effectively 
>communicate. 
> The nuance of choosing one word over another is gone. Why do you want 
>that? 
> Let the words be distinct and hold clear meaning. If all the words begin 
>to 
> mean everything, than you won't be able to say anything at all. Strange, 
> and this isn't the only place I notice this happening. I think Orwell 
>was 
> making that point in 2x4 fashion, he just got the year wrong.
> 
> I'm becoming a word curmudgeon. Is this something that happens when you 
>get 
> older? If one more person tells me he is anxious when he is really 
>eager, 
> I'm giving him a fat lip.
> 
> kim
> 
> 
> ______________________________________________________________________
> Kim Flint                     | Looper's Delight
> kflint@loopers-delight.com    | http://www.loopers-delight.com
>