static variables

Ian Kelly ian.g.kelly at gmail.com
Wed Dec 2 15:30:29 EST 2015


On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 9:30 AM, Antoon Pardon
<antoon.pardon at rece.vub.ac.be> wrote:
> Op 02-12-15 om 15:15 schreef Ian Kelly:
>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 7:41 AM, Antoon Pardon
>> <antoon.pardon at rece.vub.ac.be> wrote:
>>> Op 02-12-15 om 14:11 schreef Steven D'Aprano:
>>>> On Wed, 2 Dec 2015 10:09 pm, Antoon Pardon wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> If you want your arguments to be taken seriously, then you better should.
>>>>> If you use an argument when it suits you and ignore it when it doesn't
>>>>> you are showing you don't really have an argument. You are just showing
>>>>> your preference and making it sound like an argument.
>>>> "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds."
>>> So? That doesn't show that we are talking about a foolish consistency here.
>> It's actually the truest use of the quote that I've yet seen on this
>> list. Emerson was complaining about those who adhere to opinions that
>> they've expressed in the past solely for the sake of appearing
>> consistent in their values, which is basically what you're accusing
>> Steven of not doing.
>
> That is not true. I expect that the next time someone will try to
> argue for private attributes or some such, Steven will be among
> those that will support the "consenting adults" line. This view
> of his, is not in the past, it is for all i know still in the
> present. That his latest expression was in the past, doesn't make
> his view something of the past.
>
> If there was a reason to think he had changed his mind, you would
> have been right. But I see no reason for that.
>
> There is a difference between changing your mind and thus change
> your arguments and using an argument selectively.

A person can hold one opinion in some contexts and an opposing opinion
in others.

"Speak what you think now in hard words, and to-morrow speak what
to-morrow thinks in hard words again, though it contradict every thing
you said to-day."

"There will be an agreement in whatever variety of actions, so they be
each honest and natural in their hour. For of one will, the actions
will be harmonious, however unlike they seem. These varieties are lost
sight of at a little distance, at a little height of thought. One
tendency unites them all. The voyage of the best ship is a zigzag line
of a hundred tacks. See the line from a sufficient distance, and it
straightens itself to the average tendency. Your genuine action will
explain itself, and will explain your other genuine actions. Your
conformity explains nothing. Act singly, and what you have already
done singly will justify you now."



More information about the Python-list mailing list