|
This is a perfect example of how Peter Staudenmaier
will frequently argue a different point from the one presented
him.
To: <anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com>
References: <20040305234720.10061.qmail@web14426.mail.yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] Re: Morality and Racism
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 21:25:00 -0500
Hi Daniel, you wrote:
"All you have accomplished so far is to arrange a narrow
selection of these documents that you have culled from sources
that Anthroposophists have published into such a pattern that
it paints the picture that you would like to present."
Peter Staudenmaier:
I think you are mistaken about the range of sources I use,
as well as their provenance. I rely on a broad array of anthroposophical
publications, as well as a large number of non-anthroposophical
publications.
Daniel:
Your first statement is a classic "wiggle" move
of argumentation. You are countering a different point than
the one I made. I said nothing derogatory about the range
of sources you use or their provenance. I questioned the usefulness
of the entire collection.
Daniel Hindes
Peter Staudenmaier did not respond to this message.
|
