Re: Breton, Cornish & French

May I respond to this note by Briggs, or 'us' as he refers to himself, 
that 
I perceive no 'us' here. Single sentence replies are sometimes sufficient
to 
simple issues, but on complex diversions he himself has raised, are rather

suspect.

What a joke correspondence, with someone who does not even now the very 
terms of inquiry in order to make any sufficient response!

What such people do to newsgroups is to inhibit participation, since they
do 
not attempt to engage any subject [topic long forgotten] but resent the 
inquirer themselves since it discomfits their fixed and virulently
expressed 
reception of the issue.

John Briggs is not abnormal, in the sense that he is not an usual denizen
of 
newsgroups.

But where his talents begin, are unknown.

Phil Innes

"John Briggs" <john.briggs4@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:pcWCj.11$va4.1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Chess One wrote:
>> "John Briggs" <john.briggs4@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> news:PBhyj.24723$%W6.10009@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> Chess One wrote:
>>
>>>> When I have asked people here they have become [mildly] abusive,
>>>> dismissive, vague and evasive! Yet ontology has to do with the
>>>> nature of things, including our investigation of them. It is not an
>>>> attack or challenge to any particular knowledge, as much as to
>>>> *****s the means we come to resolve on the process of investigation.
>>>
>>> Ontology?  Make up your mind: you were wittering about
>>> "epistemology" a while back.
>>
>> A while back I may have used that term in context to the difference
>> between this and another approach. Did you have some point to make on
>> the /topic/ of the post to which you refer, or the mtehod of inquiry,
>> or are you noticing 2 different terms that you personally cannot
>> distinguish between?
>> Come on John! You pretend to very much here, your opinions are v .. a
>> .. s .. t,  and your own expression is O! so vague!
>>
>> For the pedants among us, including self, ontological expression
>> contains a measure of metaphysical admittion, [that is to say, of
>> Ideas, which one does not own as one's own] whereas epistemology
>> concerns the nature [or observation] of nature iteslf.
>
> Not many of us are going to agree with that.
> -- 
> John Briggs
>
>