Re: Gerold Firl and ethnographic data

Len Piotrowski (
Wed, 2 Oct 1996 21:02:08 GMT

In article <52uitr$> (Gerold Firl) writes:


>In article <>, (Len Piotrowski) writes:

>|> In article <52sb85$> (Gerold Firl) writes:

>|> >Are you claiming that I am misrepresenting
>|> >elman service, or that _profiles_ is "wrong or fraudulent"? I'd like
>|> >to see you substantiate either one. Show an instance where I have
>|> >wrongfully or fraudulantly "assigned" (sic) something, or where the
>|> >book is "wrong or fraudulent".
>|> >Here's a scientific prediction: you won't be able to do it.

>|> Don't bet on it, Firl. Here's ...
>|> "Some salient facts:
> (excerpts from previous articles deleted)
>|> That should do nicely for now, don't you think?

>You've done a very nice job of excerpting, but you have done nothing to
>back up your accusation of "error" and/or "fraud". What exactly is
>erroneous? And again, are you saying that service is wrong, or that I
>am misrepresenting service? And try to get it straight: there is a
>difference between fact and prediction. None of my predictions can be
>corroborated in _profiles_, or any other reference I've ever read.

Nice attempt to avoid responsibility for your work and words, Firl, reminiscent
of your style of scientific argument. But you have been presented, to your
consternation no doubt, with several "instances" where you have
misrepresented your "salient facts" as based on the authority of Elman
Service. Suppose you contemplate the reality of that fact before you vaunt
your accomplishments any further.

>Lenny, I wonder if you have any insight into the nature and origin of
>your pathological pugilism? In a way it's good; having my ideas
>challenged forces me to formulate them in a more careful way, and I'm
>glad that you have decided to take-on that role. However, I think the
>dialog would work much better if you could refrain from the gratuitous
>insults, and we wouldn't need so much repitition if you could try and
>understand what I'm saying before going off.

I've seen this method of personal attack from you before, in desperate efforts
to divert attention from the more prickly dilemma at hand. I would suggest you
quickly end your silly struggles before you blunder into something even worse.

>Just a suggestion, but who knows? - if you had a little integrity, you
>might even find some of that elusive meaningful human interaction you've
>been searching for.

That presupposes an interest in sharing the held meaning of the Other, which,
as you probably are becoming more and more aware, is a matter under serious
doubt in this thread.



"If you can't remember what mnemonic means, you've got a problem."
- perlstyle