[PEN-L:32516] Re: Re: pc language

[Carrol Cox <cbcox@xxxxxxxxx>]

Doyle Saylor wrote:
> [clip]
>  However, that is why I referred to Fisher ("Vehement
> Passions", Philip Fisher, Princeton University Press, 2002)  in my reply to
> Jim Devine. [clip]
>
> Whenever colorful expressions come up in every day language to indicate gut
> reactions (Vehement Passions) those labels are just normal element of human
> cognition.

Doyle, since the term "vehemnt passions" occurs in a book title, one
published by a distinguished university press, I would imagine it is a
technical term, not equivalent to an ordinary joining of the two words.
But separated from the context o Fisher's argument (with which I am not
acquainted), _and_ from the context of your long an closely reasoned
post, the phrase can easily be made fun of. Your post invites
conversation, but what you are probably going to get in response is not
discussion of your arguments but a picking out of this phrase by some
backbiter and a mocking of your use of it. Probably they will suggest
that you yourself are a bloodless intellect incapable of feeling strong
passion. Don't respond to such baiting if it occurs.

Perhaps you should write a commentary on Fisher for the list.

Carrol