Quote:
Originally Posted by thedoc
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedoc
Quote:
Originally Posted by peacegirl
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedoc
If Peacegirl really wants to discuss the chapters in the book, she needs to give real answers to the questions that are asked, and not constantly insist that people should go back and read the book again. If people don't get the answers when they do read the book, reading it again isn't going to help without some clarification from Peacegirl.
|
They have not read the book thedoc. I have never minded answering questions if they were relevant, but instead all I get are rebuttals that he is wrong. I'm just glad this group isn't representative of the entire populace. |
It is obvious from the questions and comments that "They" have read the book, some have made notes and refer to them in fraiming the questions. The content of the questions and comments is not possible without actually reading the book, it would also not be possible to just randomly go to a page in the book and pull out a specific quote, without knowing where it is in the book. In order to paraphrase and satirize the book one must first know what is in the book. |
People skimmed the book and when they heard the claim regarding the eyes, that was the end of any serious conversation. Be truthful, haven't you ever read a book more than once and kept getting new meaning from it each time?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by thedoc
You're only basis for the claim that people have not read the book is that they disagree with what is written in the book and to disagree with it "They" must have read it first.
|
They disagree because they don't have a full understanding. They think they do, but they really don't. They call his claims assertions and modal fallacies, but that's not what they are. |
I've read the book at least twice and some parts several times just to look for some specific reference, but no, I did not get any new meaning from each reading. To get any meaning from a book, there has to be meaning there in the first place, and Lessans book has no meaning to find. |
How come I'm still learning from this knowledge? This tells me what a good reader you are.
