Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

4272Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Peter's definitions

Expand Messages
  • at@ael...
    Apr 7, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi again Daniel, you wrote:
      "These arguments would be nothing new to you, and I doubt you would consider them any more seriously the second time that the first."
      Peter Staudenmaier:
      You're quite right that I do not consider these objections serious. I think they are obviously frivolous. For example, it is extremely easy to show when someone else has taken a quote out of context. All you have to do is provide the preceding or following portions of the text and show that they contradict the original quoted passage. None of you has ever done that. As for mistranslations, you and Detlef believe that *other anthroposophists* have mistranslated both of the texts in question; all you charge me with is agreeing with these anthroposophist translations. If you want me to take your arguments seriously, I'll have to request that you offer some serious arguments. What do you say?
      Read the archives.
    • Show all 32 messages in this topic