DS: To dear "gadfly" fodeja,
fodeja: Oh, thank you - that was nice . But I don't deserve that title at all. I'm afraid I also don't think _you_ deserve that title, but hey, panta rhei.
DS: I know that I do not "deserve" the title. That's why I lovingly bestowed it on you. And while I know you're humble, modest, and self-effacing, I insist that you reconsider your relunctance--your sheer reticence!--to accept the descriptive term "gadfly" as your own. Why, in time, it could even become a rigid designator, if it is not already so.
BTW, thanks for the basic Heraclitean citation. All things are in a state of flux. How wonderful! But have you read the Heraclitean fragments in their entirety? I ask, because I'm having trouble translating a certain fragment, to wit, fragment 81. See what you can make of it, my dear fodeja: eimen te kai ouk eimen. Can you please tell me what Heraclitus is trying to communicate in this fragment? Thanks a bunch! This constituent is simpler than panta rhei. So you should have no problem with this construction.
DS: How do you know I did not recognize it? As I said earlier, flocci non facio.
Fo: Now c'mon, you wouldn't resist a chance to impress us with your wisdom, would you?
DS: After all of this time, Fodeja, and you still have not learned that I neither have wisdom nor knowledge. Nor am I trying to impress anyone. If only all men were aware of their ignorance in the same manner as I am! Then I could stop pestering you lovely people and get home to my wife, Xanthippe. Sorry, wrong philosopher.
DS: Exactly how much education do I have?
Fo: Far less than you'd like us to believe, I think.
DS: Can you read minds, hUIE? Or are you a "pop" psychologist like my good friend, AlanF? How do you know what I want you or anyone else here to believe? Have I told you what I want you to believe about my edjucation? Could you kindly show me where I have done such? What is education? Could you define the term you are employing?
Much appreciated,
Dan
Duns the Scot