Cob: Re: Re: "objectivity" vs. "philosophy" vs. (The Book)

[Guy Prouty]

Yes, I do think that discussing philosophy is very important for this list.
This is one of the main reasons why I think many of us have joined the list.
All aspects of cob construction are important as well.

But I do have to disagree with the angry rhetoric on the list.  Please Ocean
and Darrel, if you have are having problems that require such rhetoric, do
so in private.  It can put a nasty taste to the list that I don't think is
welcome by most members.

My best to both of you!

Guy Prouty


----- Original Message -----
From: "Ocean" <ocean at peacemaking.org>
To: <coblist at deatech.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2002 12:36 PM
Subject: Cob: Re: "objectivity" vs. "philosophy" vs. (The Book)


> Hello Cobbies!
>
> Regarding my wholesale lack of "objectivity"...I did consider editing
> the outrage out of my last posting, and just discussing the
> philosophical issues, but I was sure this would just invite more
> slamming and reaction from Mr. Henman.
>
> So instead I chose to respond in the same childlike manner as his
> original posting.  Predictably, all he did was repeat over and over "I
> was just looking for information" and deny his criticism of an unread
> work and reactionary stance against philosophy.  This is the
> manipulative behavior of a passive-aggressive personality, and I was not
> surprised, in fact somewhat pleased to see him defend his being such an
> a**hole...
>
> Enough shirt sleeve psychology!  I am really interested in your thoughts
> about the philosophical issues I discussed, and want to encourage anyone
> else who feels likewise to also address the issue at hand:  is
> philosophy important to this list?  Should this also be a forum for
> thould those who entertain a deeper motivation for cob?   Are we indeed
> a "movement" with charismatic leaders who guide throngs of eager
> followers down the road to Housing Nirvana (ooo, sounds kinda cultish,
> doesn't it)?  Can't we have some fun with this?
>
> Ocean
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, August 14, 2002, at 01:58 AM, Darel Henman wrote:
> DELETED (not worth reading again!)
>