in reply to Re^3: Musing on Monastery Content
in thread Musing on Monastery Content
It appears to me that Old Grey Bear's original posting and tye's response address this contradiction. You have addressed the "fact of life" here but I'd also really like to see your contribution from an ethical or philosophical view.
Belated afterthought, in part as addendum to grandparent:
a definition of "retract" (from http://www.hyperdictionary.com/dictionary/retract, not exactly the OED, but sufficient, I think):
- v formally reject or disavow a formerly held belief, usually under pressure; "He retracted his earlier statements about his religion"; "She abjured her beliefs"
- v pull inward or towards a center; "The pilot drew in the landing gear"; "The cat retracted his claws"
- v use a surgical instrument to hold open (the edges of a wound or an organ)
- v shrink back, as in fear
Arguably, definition two could be stretched to approximate "delete" -- but that's a long stretch for a poor approximation. What X tried to do, AFAIK, was not "to retract" in the sense of the first definition, but "to delete" ...and, perhaps not "just by the way," to consign others' views to the bitbucket. That's a very different action.
SO DIFFERENT, in fact, that I almost wish to disavow my earlier diatribe because it ignored (to my embarassment and perhaps to others' detriment) the distinction. Consider this a retraction of sorts, but note that it's not a deletion, which would "behead" your valued observations.
|
---|
Replies are listed 'Best First'. | |
---|---|
Re^5: Musing on Monastery Content
by apotheon (Deacon) on Oct 19, 2004 at 18:51 UTC |