Subject:
|
Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 15 Mar 2000 15:30:04 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1894 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> Steve's wrong, I feel.
Hey! I'm willing to admit to making mistakes, but in this case, I'm
being misunderstood. I was just disagreeing with Todd's understanding
of the implications of 'exception which proves the rule'. I've never
heard that phrase used with ironic intent. Then again, I'm occasionally
wood, so I could have missed it.
Steve
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Does God have a monopoly on gods?
|
| Steve's wrong, I feel. Exceptions invalidate a rule, unless they are themselves subject to a subrule (that is, that they are predictable exceptions) and I feel "the exception that proves the rule" is a bit of gentle humor pointing out that (...) (25 years ago, 14-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
541 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
