moderating not moderation

[purushottama bilimoria]

A discussion on Paul Tillich on Buddhism would be most appropriate and 
informative, in the critico-comparative interest. Or, when discussing 
Plato and Platonism, should one be debarred from making reference to 
Arabic thinkers such as Avicenna, Averroes, down to say Al-Ghazzali, and 
elsewhere to Maimonides and Spinoza?


On Tue, 14 Feb 1995, Carlos Lopez wrote:

> 
> On Mon, 13 Feb 1995, Leslaw Borowski wrote:
> 
> > To C.Lopez: Do you think "netiquette" is only one,accepted by all and 
> > obvious to all?  Lesl~aw Borowski
> >  
> > 
> I would expect so.  One doesn't join a list on Buddhism and then start a 
> discussion on Paul Tillich.  The topics of most list are clearly 
> demarcated.  Perhaps, this list should go about demarcating more clearly 
> what classical indology means.  Once this is clear to everyone, then 
> netiquette for this list would be clear.  I am certain that everyone here 
> would be quite vocal if someone began a discussion on Church History; a 
> topic which is clearly outside of the confines of this list.  Again, 
> "classical Indology" should be further defined and clarified.
> 
> Carlos Lopez
> Harvard University
> Dept of Sanskrit
> 
>  
>