Thanks for your thoughtful, useful reply. You said:
> At best, your messages are very conducive to multiple
>interpretations.
I agree with you that my messages, concerning this thread, might
provoke a variety of constructions. JW
> And, as you can see -- other writers agree with me that you might
>try to be cautious about how you use the language.
So far only a few days have elapsed, and I've seen very few public
posts regarding this thread. Perhaps more will appear. JW
> The message in which you reproduce Brian's and Bob's messages, as
> I see it, doesn't make a useful point.
The fact that you have not yet seen what I regard as a useful point
does not mean that others might not. I will continue to be
attentive. I still believe events need to be construed over time and
not just for the immediate moment.
Joe Whitehurst
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
The greatest empiricists among us are only empiricists on reflection:
when left to their instincts, they dogmatize like infallible popes.
James, 1896
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%