search  current discussion  categories  philosophy 

ethical pots

updated tue 25 jun 02


BVCuma on mon 24 jun 02

My statement...
"Methods of making pottery do not determine worth, efficiency or
Should read
"Methods of making pottery do not determine worth, efficacy or
I stand by this statement.
Sorry Jonathan...
my typo error.
Efficacy, my dictionary doesn't have that word...
but google does...
Efficacy: Power to produce effects; operation or energy of an agent or =
The use of the word in your sentence is pointless.
You stand by your statement?..ok
A dialouge would also be pointless then too.
As you refuse to even consider your own contradictions.
(not this one...the other )
What bothers me now is that this is published material
moving into god knows who's hands...
The paragraph, I find, is very loaded
confusing and misleading.
besides being somewhat out of context.
If you will.. I would say...
That you are imposing an agenda here.
Seems to me the innocent studio potter
gets twisted into your version of what a potter can be.
I have no problem with that
But I do have a problem with this...
Young minds have a need to create an identity.
There is a clear distinction between an industrialist
and a studio or even production potter.
Ask your friend Harry why he sold you the rights for "love pot"
Don't bother I'll tell you... he wanted to remain a potter.
Why did you buy it.. because your a producer=20
making a product with an eye on volumes...
any method, actually only the fastest most efficient.
No prob...
we sure would be in trouble if everyone wanted to be a potter.
Jonathan, there is no need to drag your version of being a potter
behind you telling everyone your as good as they are.
Obviously you are talented and skilled.
But drop the stinks.