<<Argument implies some sort of thought process, logic>>
And, I would argue, willingness to see from the other's point of view. Unfortunately, there is all too little of that these days. Take our fisher friend, Pez. He sees fishing and hunting as sports like tennis, and can't accept any other perspective. He doesn't see the eight lane freeway leading out of his home to the stream as an irreversible take of wildlife and wildlife habitat, but he's willing to judge a hunter with blood on his hands, meat in the freezer, and a viable population of animals for next year's hunt. Why I'll bet Pez buys his rods from L. L. Bean's, so how could he possibly believe that L. L. Bean was ever OTHER than a Yuppie hangout. But it was, and I still have the snowshoes and boots I bought from L.L. long before his catalog used New York models.
Lorrie, I believe, does put logic and thought behind her arguments. She merely argues from a mistaken premise.
Now JL, despite the similarity of our names, I doubt we would agree on much. But it certainly is fun to have this forum for jousting, isn't it? |
