OMDE601 Discussion thread

13.1 :-) Brent to Thomas' Intro


3.1.1 :-? Thomas

Dear Brent,

in order to signal clearly the camp you belong to, include the smiley in the header. Like I have done just now therefore I should support the opposing position.

Your argument is conceptually muddled up since you do not distinguish between a seminar and a lecture. Your reference to Module 3 as your alleged evidence is rather spurious. You seem incapable to quote these ideas so that I could examine if they are substantial and numerous. Furthermore your implicit understanding of 'different people expressing different ideas' as coming near to what is a good debate is revealing. The minimum which you would have to show is that the different ideas relate to each other.

Though not listed among the opposers, your statement made me one. It was conceptually flawed (mixing up lecture and seminar), spurious in evidence (very lumpsum reference to module 3) and fundamentally misconceived with regard to what is a good debate.

Unconvinced.

Thomas