On Sun, 15 Feb 2004, Michael Dawson wrote:
> What was the point of your post? You defended Carrol's usual dismissal of
> the idea that "saying the truth effectively is in itself of any good." You
> tried to do so by using Carrol's status as an "academic" as your substantive
> argument.
Reread the post. They're archived. Your statement above is a gross misrepresentation. See how easy it is for people to misinterpret things? (--And if you disagree with me in this post, note that you're further illustrating my point: truth telling is not enough. We willfully or inadvertently missing the point all the time when we communicate; that's part of the messiness of human interaction.)
Miles