(urth) Like a good Neighbor

[David Stockhoff]

On 11/21/2011 2:12 PM, Gerry Quinn wrote:
> *From:* David Stockhoff <mailto:dstockhoff at verizon.net>
> > On 11/21/2011 1:42 PM, Gerry Quinn wrote:
>
> > > He *is* an obvious problem. James previously argued that he was a
> > > Neighbour who replaced Horn, and that fits okay with his theory. But
> > > if it can’t be that Neighbour, it must be someone else, and the
> > > question is who? If it was another Neighbour, why did he leave him
> > > stuck in the pit to die again? Why didn’t he say anything?
>
> > Why are those problems? Did you read anything I proposed on those 
> topics?
> I saw nothing but gnomic questions and inane sarcasm. They are 
> problems unless the ‘rescue Horn’ mission proposed by James is 
> scripted by the Marx Bothers.

That may explain why you're so hostile---you read looking for sarcasm.

And btw James did not propose a "rescue mission." To even say that says 
more about you than you realize.

You still haven't explained why they are problems. You may also not 
realize this, but to propose a theory you need to actually state your 
position on a few basic things. I see why you haven't, because then your 
assumptions would be vulnerable.

See, I still don't know why you think those are problems for James's 
(and my, and Marc's) theory. You dodged it again, this time pleading 
incomprehension.

Why are they problems?

> > > > How do you know which Neighbor it was? Why do you assume the 
> Neighbor
> > > > who resurrected him is no longer also still a non-Horn Neighbor?
> > > I think James is proposing that a Neighbour’s spirit went into him,
> > > presumably rendering that particular Neighbour hors de combat.
>
> > Presumably, yes. Based on .... ?
> One body per soul, that kind of thing. Sure, you can argue around it, 
> and say the Neighbour made a copy of himself and injected it into Horn 
> as a new soul. And then left him in the pit with no water. Why not? 
> Those crazy, crazy Neighbours. They’ll do anything for a lark.

For example, your "theory" assumes that "Neighbors are exactly like 
humans." Good luck defending that.