Ok, it's been a long day so there is a heavy twang of sarcasm in this and I'm almost certainly picking up on only a few insignificant words... On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 04:34:20PM +0100, Dan Argent wrote: > Taking this back to art - if you don't paint by the rules, then you could > never be a great artist. Huh? What about if you strictly paint by 'the rules'? Does this necessarily make you a great artist? What about Painting by Numbers? Who's the artist there? The creator of the blank canvas, the hobbyist that applies the paint, or da Vinci for letting the idea out of the bag? > I think that introducing an artifical sport where you can re-write the rules > each time an exception is found doesn't really help the discussion. That's a sport in itself, a meta-sport if you will. Each side trying to beat the other in a game of argument, logic, and wit. Let's use the 'Pissing Contest' as our example. ;o) > That's not the point I am arguing. The point is that you should not > be limiting yourself by thinking in those terms. And that by thinking in > that way, can never reach your full potential. Sounds like the pep-talk we all received at school. "Aim high; then if you fall short, you have still achieved something... etc." Have we really added anything to this in the discussion? -- Dave Turner http://figroll.com/
Attachment:
pgp00008.pgp
Description: PGP signature