Re: Winds order

On Aug 15, 2:55?am, al <a...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Furthermore, I gave reasons why the extrapolation of "wan" was
incorrect, but they fell on deaf ears. I gave examples for the use
of "wan" in context with many other Chinese terms. They passed
by blank eyes.

No they didn't! I gave you my reasons within the context of the
discussion. Those reasons were very well detailed. So please don't try
and 'straw man' my responses again.
"Passed by blank eyes" is a completely unfair representation of my
response to your assertions. Just because I do not agree with your
assertions - and I gave you detailed reasons for why - is no excuse
for your uncharitable rendering of my response.

Michael, the expressions "fell on deaf ears" and "passed by blank
eyes" are local phrases in figurative speech. When someone tries
repeatedly to get through in communication with another person or a
group, a common expression used here is just what I have said. It was
a reflection of frustration on my part for having failed in getting my
idea across along with annoyance for the resistance encountered from
the other party.

Hello Allan. I understand these expressions as they are used here in a
similar way. However, when they are used here they mean that one
person is ignoring the other person unreasonably, by not giving them a
fair hearing and discussion of what they have to say.

You did get your message across after some discussion. But in the end,
as far as I was concerned, it was not convincing for the reasons I
outlined.

[snip]
They were
ignored by you and Michael. I suggested showing the images to
> > the Group for their input and judgment to see if those were
bird-like engravings. You and Michael declined. It seems as
though evidence is only what you want to see or hear.

And these phrases, "Ignored by" and "declined" and "...only what you
want to see or hear", from the above, support what I was saying. The
one interpretation that is common to all three of these is that I did
not give you a fair hearing and I did not discuss your ideas with you
and I did not give reasonable rebuttles etc to your ideas. In short, I
ignored your ideas and I declined your offer for no good reasons -
hence "evidence is only what I want to see or hear".

So even though I can understand your frustration and annoyance, if you
forgive me for saying so, that is no excuse to characterize my
responses in such an uncharitable manner.

Can you please direct me to the posts where your offer was made
and the post in which I declined? I do not recall what my reponse
was. If you are going to make an accusation like that then please
put in the references to where I can find what you are accusing me of.

Our long discussion on symbols and particularly the "wan" started
picked up with Post 216 May 6, 217 May 7 and 219 May 8.
Post #150 April 21 was a discussion on money cards.

But I gave reasonable responses to all of your points. I read what you
had to say and I critically evaluated it and gave my reasons for why I
could not agree with your views......

For the "birds", I will look some more. I remember I sent you email
attachment of images. Same for the spools of threads for weaving.> [snip]

....... and similarly for these. I expected you to rebut my reasons if
you had any evidence for doing so.

I thought I saw a reference to "straw man" argument you were remarking
on my statement. But I cannot find it to comment in reply. Maybe next
time. I dislike to be accused of that too, Michael.

Fair enough. But your replies, as far as I am concerned, contain
characterizations of my replies which are wrong. You gave misleading
representations of my responses which made you look like the victim of
people unwilling to admit to your revelations. By representing me that
way, a reader - who may not have followed the exchanges - can
mistakenly think that your ideas are correct or with strong evidential
support, by default etc etc.

Hence the 'straw man' term that decribes your representations of my
responses.

++++++++++++++++++++++++> > The directions relate to SPACE. The seasons represent TIME. >> The 3 basic suits symbolize everything you can think of. The > >>flowers and other words relate with life (which covers growth, death, >>longevity, virtues, beauty and power, peace and harmony etc. etc.). >> What more evidence do you need to understand and appreciate >>that the game is metaphor of the universe!

This is an interesting idea. Now, it is up to you to directly connect
it with the games of the period. Documentation or some such
evidence will elevate your idea beyond the purely speculative realm.

I could use some help. But who can I turn to with such a "wacky"
"notion"?!

I think it was your use of the periodic table etc that was termed
'wacky' (and NOT by me). The notion you have described above has a
certain internal consistency with maque. But so do many other things.
I could create many other metaphorical descriptions that would also be
consistent with maque. But the crunch comes in showing that they are
in reality actually, directly, connected to the game.

Unfortunately, having a notion is the easy part. Doing the actual
spade work in digging up reasonable evidence that supports your notion
is the really hard part.

You have to do that yourself. Unfortunately I do not have any material
relating to you ideas that could help you other than what I have sent
you.

Cheers

.

Loading