'What is your name?' 'Menno Rubingh.' 'Do you deny having written the
following?':
> None of the two above criticisms however is a very direct criticism of my
> point that any useful theory (that is, any 'true' theory) must
> necessarily always be a theory that complies with D.O.-ism. (In other words,
> if a theory does not yield POSITIVE, useful, insights and possibilities being
> capable of exploitation in a D.O. way, then we can immediately discard that
> theory as 'false'.)
Again, is this saying anything besides "Dynamic Optimism is right"? Or is
there some interesting set of theories which you think we must reject if
we accept Dynamic Optimism?
-Dan
-unless you love someone-
-nothing else makes any sense-
e.e. cummings
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:02:16 MDT