Men like Freud, Jung and Keynes arent philosophers pur sang, but they are in the 100 list because their impact on Western society can not be ignored. And in that sense they also play a role in the development of philosophy.
In 1921 Keynes published his only philosophical work, "A Treatise on probability", which is still considered a philosophical classic.
Let me try to explain a little of the thesis of this book. A proposition is a statement that has a truth value. The statement can be true or false. For Keynes however a proposition can be probable or improbable. A proposition has probability only in relation to some other propositions taken as premises.
Hence a proposition may have different probabilities on different premises. Take for instance the proposition "Virus X is lethal for the human organism". When the premises are observations of only a certain age group and sex, the proposition will be less probable then when it is based on observations of all age groups and sexes.
The main subject of this book is, as you may have guessed, inductive reasoning, a basic method in science. His fundamental thesis is that there are inferences in which premises do not entail the conclusion but are nevertheless, just by themselves, objectively more or less good reason for believing it.
This thesis seem to require the existence of different degrees of implication. Such degrees are Keynes's probabilities. Hume would have rejected this thesis on induction, but to Keynes this thesis appeared to be necessay as a means of avoiding skepticism about induction.
Although Keynes definitely could have had a carreer in the philosophy of logic and mathematics he chose otherwise. This resulted in important works like "A Treatise on Money"(1930) and his "General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money" (1936). As you probably will know: his field of interest shifted from philosophy and mathematics to economics.
A 120 years before Keynes Adam Smith explained in his work "The Wealth of Nations" how political economics should work. To refresh your memory, he held the view that in a world of private property and free market economy unintended consequences of intended actions are benificial for society.
The idea behind this is that when we pursue our selfinterest, we unintentionally serve the interests of society.
Suppose John wants to become rich, so he starts a business in selling things for which is a substantial demand. Unintended this business has advantages for others: for people who gonna work for John, for other firms that produce materials for John's product, for buyers who are happy with the product...and so on
A beautiful selfregulating process, where the government not should interfere. The individual selfinterest would be the drive behind the economical processes.
Keynes came with radically different ideas. He saw an active role for the government in guiding the econmical processes of the country. In his "General Theory...", written during the Depression of the 30s, Keynes argued, that the depression was caused by a lack of consumer's demand.
The solution was simple: the government should stimulate consumption in such a case by increasing its own expenses. And when the economy is improving again, the government should increase taxes and lower its expenses to get rid of its budgetary deficit.
When commerce and industry flourish, the government should keep a low profile. When there shows up a recession, the government should increase its expenses to stimulate the economy. A complete different approach then the old liberal "laissez-faire" economy of Adam Smith and J.S. Mill.
And when we look around, we still see the great impact of these ideas on our daily life. And we have seen the differences in history. While most of us live in a world where Keynes's ideas are still effective, we also have seen how it works when the government, based on the ideas of Marx, wants an almost 100% control of the economic process.
The Discussion
[13:17] Herman Bergson: Sofar Keynes....
[13:18] Herman Bergson: If you have any questions or remarks, feel free...:-)
[13:18] Gemma Cleanslate: I think i read that as he aged he changed his beliefs
[13:18] Gemma Cleanslate: and disputed his own books
[13:19] Samuel Okelly: On what grounds did he support the inference that te consequence of active individual self-interest would present a beneficial consequence to society? Wouldn’t it be more accurate to simply say that some actions will be beneficial and some won’t?
[13:19] Scheimesu Demonia: yes, the govenrment should increase expenses how, more specifically?
[13:19] Scheimesu Demonia: according to keynes...
[13:19] Herman Bergson: That wasnt Keynes, Samuel....that was Adam Smith who said so
[13:20] Samuel Okelly: ahh i see..., i am getting my wires crossed here ;-)
[13:20] Herman Bergson: To increase expenses...build more roads, schools, etc
[13:20] Stanley Aviatik: His concepts do seem rather too simplistic do you not think
[13:20] Gemma Cleanslate: I guess Roosevelt liked his thoughts
[13:20] Gemma Cleanslate: that was the wpa
[13:21] Laila Schuman: and they worked
[13:21] Osrum Sands: Well it worked in closed economies of the 40 & 50 befor the globalization of capital
[13:21] Vladimir Apparatchik: No - it was the clasiacl economists who were simplistic - keynes was vert sophisticated
[13:21] Ganymede Blackburn: Well, as applied to the great depression, they were right on the mark, imo.
[13:21] Mickorod Renard: I guess more government expenditure would find its way into reinflating the economy by putting more money into it Schme
[13:21] Herman Bergson: Well..I am not an economist, but the basics of econonomy seems to me demand and supply..
[13:21] Scheimesu Demonia: yes, that's what i suppossed, but for example, is it alright for the government to use its resources to force those who sell a product to lower its price?
[13:21] Stanley Aviatik: Right or wrong it seems to be pragmatic
[13:21] Osrum Sands: his theory kept up demarnd
[13:22] Herman Bergson: Just a seconds...
[13:22] Vladimir Apparatchik: Keynes understood that economies did not automatically balance supply and demand
[13:22] Herman Bergson: The importance of Keynes lies in the fact that he shaped our politics and society
[13:22] Gudrun Odriscoll: and of course there is the engineering of demands -- so who controls demands and supply
[13:22] Vladimir Apparatchik: you can get boom and bust
[13:22] Osrum Sands: rather then force lower prices keep the supply of money sufficent to purchase the goods
[13:23] Ze Novikov: but Os is not that inflationary?
[13:23] Ganymede Blackburn: Yes, it is.
[13:23] Gemma Cleanslate: I like that idea Osrum
[13:23] Gemma Cleanslate: :-)
[13:23] Vladimir Apparatchik: Keynes saw himself as saving capitalism
[13:23] Osrum Sands: well it worked in closed economies of the 40's and 50's
[13:23] Scheimesu Demonia: hmmm...
[13:23] Gemma Cleanslate: yes
[13:23] Gemma Cleanslate: it did
[13:23] Wyeth Bailey: well it seems to hold at least for a time that when the government overspends on say the war, the economy improves for a time fueled by growth in defense industries, however, there reaches apoint of diminishig returns, like where we sit today, no?
[13:23] Gemma Cleanslate: i read
[13:23] Herman Bergson: he was a good reply to Marx
[13:23] Ganymede Blackburn: Ze: Inflation is not good or bad in itself.
[13:24] Osrum Sands: good point Wyeth
[13:24] Ze Novikov: ty
[13:24] Vladimir Apparatchik: But the Bush adminitraton is using classi keynesian tactics now
[13:25] Herman Bergson: I dont know how they can finance a war.....costs a fortune and where does all the money come from?
[13:25] Ganymede Blackburn: well, wyeth...
[13:25] Cailleach Shan: All economies seem cyclical.
[13:25] Alarice Beaumont: yes.. think so too vladimir
[13:25] Osrum Sands: yes and in Australia its the opposite
[13:25] Scheimesu Demonia: lots of things seem cylcical
[13:25] Gudrun Odriscoll: what about Europe. let me know
[13:25] Osrum Sands: as the USA reduces the cost of money Aus is increasing it both attempting to acheive the same thing
[13:25] Osrum Sands: will be interesting to watch
[13:26] Vladimir Apparatchik: when Capital is successful it says leave us alone - when it struggles it becomes Keynesian !
[13:26] Qwark Allen: we live in cyclical universe
[13:26] Ganymede Blackburn: The diagnosis Keynes made for the great depression does not apply in today's economic situation. Then, the problem was overproduction coupled with lack of demand...
[13:26] Osrum Sands: hahah good point Vlad
[13:26] Scheimesu Demonia: Vladmir: !!!
[13:26] Ze Novikov: right Gany
[13:26] Gemma Cleanslate: the money for war usually comes from our grandchildren and their children
[13:26] Osrum Sands: thanks Gany
[13:27] Gudrun Odriscoll: Gemma??????
[13:27] Ganymede Blackburn: now there's also a lack of aggregate demand, but there's also underproduction. It's a lose-lose situation, one that cannot be solved with deficit spending.
[13:27] Cailleach Shan: Does Keynesian economics take credit cards into account?
[13:27] Wyeth Bailey: well there was definitely and international economy when Keynes was writing, but it did not have the speed and cohesioon it does today, for example, the stakes of the global oil industry for funmding the current war. Such reach was outside his scope at his point in histry.
[13:27] Ganymede Blackburn: Implicitly, yes. It's just another form of debt.
[13:27] Ze Novikov: Ze nods yes
[13:28] Osrum Sands: right on Wyeth
[13:28] Wyeth Bailey: the global nature and speed of today's economy, he could not have imagined, and it breaks thorugh some of his premises
[13:28] Herman Bergson: I think I gonna study economics too..this all sounds very interesting..:-)
[13:28] Gemma Cleanslate: How would you summarize his influence on politics and philosophy of today Herman
[13:28] Mickorod Renard: there are diferent ways gvernment can spend money than on war
[13:28] Vladimir Apparatchik: but aren't the coordinated actions of the world's central banks classical Keynesian?
[13:29] Scheimesu Demonia: that'd seem right wyeth.
[13:29] Wyeth Bailey: if only they woud, Mick!
[13:29] Herman Bergson: The main influence of Keynes is on our economic thinking..
[13:29] Mickorod Renard: i know
[13:29] Scheimesu Demonia: how could have imagined the speed of the actual world as something more than science fiction back then?
[13:29] Herman Bergson: In his study of the probality of the proposition he made a promissing start....
[13:30] Herman Bergson: he studied with Rusell and Whitehead...
[13:30] Herman Bergson: But he didnt continue on that
[13:30] Ze Novikov: Herman what influence has he on contemporary philosophy
[13:30] Ze Novikov: ahh
[13:30] Herman Bergson: I would say...not much
[13:30] Wyeth Bailey: lol herman
[13:31] Mickorod Renard: he predicted the ourtcome of the economic dilemma they put on germany after the 1st world war
[13:31] Vladimir Apparatchik: but he has influenced political philosophy
[13:31] Herman Bergson: As I said..he made a promissing start.....could have been as good as Betrand Russell
[13:31] Herman Bergson: yes Vladimir....there is his influence...
[13:31] Scheimesu Demonia: but his influence on statistics used for scientific research and inductive observations of the world in general,... it sound important.
[13:31] Herman Bergson: in refuting Adam Smith for instance
[13:31] Wyeth Bailey: if nothing else, he put some of Adam Smith's ideas into question, and that helps
[13:32] Wyeth Bailey: oops yes
[13:32] Herman Bergson: yes Scheimesu...
[13:32] Herman Bergson: reading about his probaility theory....I thought it was important indeed
[13:33] Vladimir Apparatchik: he is one of the great Liberals
[13:33] Herman Bergson: they say is work is still a classic
[13:33] Scheimesu Demonia: guess there is a good answer to Hume's old ideas in that book.
[13:33] Mickorod Renard: is it a bit like quantum mechanics?
[13:33] Cailleach Shan: @ Mick ???
[13:33] Herman Bergson: Yes ...I think so too
[13:33] Cailleach Shan: In what way Mick
[13:34] Mickorod Renard: so maybe he influenced the thought there too
[13:34] Scheimesu Demonia: I've heard that keynes in the end didn't like the idea of capitalism... it was a s if he considered it a necessary evil or something.
[13:34] Mickorod Renard: with his probability ideas
[13:34] Gudrun Odriscoll: that quantum mechanics and relativity do not go togheter?
[13:34] Vladimir Apparatchik: but surely Herman his work on probability is a footnote - his work on economics was seminal
[13:34] Cailleach Shan: kk
[13:34] Ganymede Blackburn: I think it's interesting how 'a jour' Keynes' ideas for regulation of the world economy is today...
[13:34] Scheimesu Demonia: a jour?
[13:34] Herman Bergson: Yes Vlad...
[13:35] Scheimesu Demonia: anyone knows what where his ideas on that field and liberal political theory so on?
[13:35] Herman Bergson: That is what I meant regarding his influence on philosophy....I took it from a narrow perspective, logic and epistemology...
[13:35] Ganymede Blackburn: He suggested a system under which both running a trade surplus as well as a trade deficit would be penalized.
[13:36] Ze Novikov: yes that is what i meant
[13:36] Ganymede Blackburn: That system was not adopted, and look where we are today...
[13:36] Scheimesu Demonia: penalized?
[13:36] Vladimir Apparatchik: He was absolutely key in helping to organise the world economy after the war in the Bretton Woods agreement
[13:36] Gudrun Odriscoll: he did not think about greed then,
[13:36] Ze Novikov: interesting...
[13:36] Ze Novikov: say more Gany
[13:36] Scheimesu Demonia: who'd have penalized a whole industry or how would that work?
[13:37] Ganymede Blackburn: Right now, China is running a huge trade surplus, the U.S. an even bigger deficit...
[13:37] Ze Novikov: yes
[13:37] Scheimesu Demonia: well, but who is going to penalize china?
[13:37] Herman Bergson: and what are the consequences?
[13:37] Wyeth Bailey wonders what Keynes would make of Halliburton Industries or the GNP of Saudi Arabia
[13:37] Gemma Cleanslate: and our deficit is our own fault!!
[13:38] Scheimesu Demonia: or how.
[13:38] Ganymede Blackburn: the result is, there's next to no growth in chinas consumer markets, while the one in the U.S. is dwindling...
[13:38] Mickorod Renard: it must be in chinas interest that the world has money to buy chinas stuff
[13:38] Ganymede Blackburn: Soon there will not be enough demand anywhere for the products made in china.
[13:38] Ze Novikov: ok got it..
[13:38] Gudrun Odriscoll: ganymede, a war could be the answer, to cut china down, all wars are somehow about breaking somebody elses economic dominance,
[13:39] Gemma Cleanslate: well i think at this time the people in china themsleves are the consumers
[13:39] Cailleach Shan: I believe China's economy will 'self regulate'
[13:39] Vladimir Apparatchik: that was Keynes great insight - markets dont necessarli balance supply and demand
[13:39] Gemma Cleanslate: and it wil take a while
[13:39] Stanley Aviatik: very true gudrun
[13:39] Wyeth Bailey: well Keynes was British in a time that the US and Britain really did control the world economy, and were imperialist in their views of the far east. We cannot afford that any more
[13:39] Laila Schuman: china is not known for it's wise decisions ... but that is a very long story
[13:39] Gudrun Odriscoll: of course, I am against wars, I only want to point out that is what normally happens, looking back into history
[13:39] Scheimesu Demonia: !!!!
[13:39] Mickorod Renard: either war or destroyin their money
[13:40] Vladimir Apparatchik: the imbalance could lead to a world slump
[13:40] Herman Bergson: Well...Keynes sounds as a box of Pandora...
[13:40] Gudrun Odriscoll: aren't we in the midst of a depression now, at least this is what I am hearing every day in the UK media
[13:41] Gemma Cleanslate: no
[13:41] Ze Novikov: recession
[13:41] Gemma Cleanslate: yes
[13:41] Mickorod Renard: most new economies end up reaching the same prob as developed economies after a period
[13:41] Stanley Aviatik: Depression is surely a subjective experience
[13:41] Alarice Beaumont: no
[13:41] Alarice Beaumont: ah.. not if looked on economie!
[13:41] Gudrun Odriscoll: fine, many talk about depression that is a step further than recession
[13:41] Wyeth Bailey: we may all agree the eceonomy is troubled if we don't agree on a label
[13:41] Vladimir Apparatchik: US is in recession but Europe isnt
[13:42] Cailleach Shan: Our economy is so small it just gets dragged around by the rest of the world.!!
[13:42] Qwark Allen: europe is
[13:42] Vladimir Apparatchik: not yet
[13:42] Qwark Allen: yes it is
[13:42] Gudrun Odriscoll: uk and europe is, honestly, why not yet vladimir
[13:42] Qwark Allen: i live there
[13:42] Mickorod Renard: depression is just a state of mind that the british government impose on its people
[13:42] Osrum Sands: in some ways all that comes back to human psychology confidence and fear
[13:42] Ze Novikov: good way to put Cailleach...
[13:42] Vladimir Apparatchik: technically recession is when you have negative growth for at least two quarters
[13:42] Qwark Allen: for me in usa, no recesion..... only in europe
[13:43] Vladimir Apparatchik: UK is still growing - only slower
[13:43] Gudrun Odriscoll: house prices are slumping, people are scared, there are articles for women who should start knitting their clothes, or it least tayloring, it is quite doomsdayish
[13:43] prez Allen: usa make war
[13:43] prez Allen: war is money
[13:43] Cailleach Shan: lol.... what a doomsday... knitting your own clothes.
[13:43] Scheimesu Demonia: Gudrun
[13:43] Scheimesu Demonia: where is that?
[13:43] Wyeth Bailey: the gloabl economy is in a state of disruption, part of a cycle, and for the first time in a few centuries, the winner may emerge to be not the US or the UK or even any country in Europe . . . there are ways for example that the Chinese are elated these dats lol because all bets are off
[13:44] Gudrun Odriscoll: prez you are right, that keeps the economy going, all these wonderful weapons
[13:44] prez Allen: of course
[13:44] Ganymede Blackburn: If I may, I'd like to say something more about Keynes and Bretton Woods...?
[13:44] Ze Novikov: China has serious structural problems ...my bet is not on China
[13:44] Vladimir Apparatchik: Gudrun - I agree that house prices are falling - a good thing too after the ludicrous increases in the past
[13:44] Wyeth Bailey: which all kind of takes us back toi the begining of herman's talk, to shifts in probability, because the premises have changed
[13:44] Osrum Sands: pls Gany
[13:44] Mickorod Renard: pls gany too
[13:44] Herman Bergson: Go ahead Ganymede
[13:45] Vladimir Apparatchik: yes ganymede
[13:45] prez Allen: when crisis is here make the war and the rest roll
[13:45] Herman Bergson: Interesting connection Wyeth...
[13:45] Ganymede Blackburn: The system he envisaged would involve the nations running a trade deficit paying a 'tax' to the world bank...
[13:45] Ganymede Blackburn: the world bank as we know it is a lot different, though.
[13:46] Herman Bergson: That is something they do in Europe..the state deficit may not be above 3%
[13:46] Herman Bergson: otherwise Buxxelles gets angry
[13:46] Ganymede Blackburn: The ones who ran a trade deficit would be, by means I don't quite recall, be discouraged from that too.
[13:47] Ganymede Blackburn: oh, did I say deficit? I meant surplus.
[13:47] Herman Bergson: Oh....(^_^)
[13:47] Gudrun Odriscoll: yes and most citizens in EU countries are angry about this, cuts of social budgets, art budgets, budget budgets, to keep the 3% going
[13:47] Herman Bergson: We really need a class in economics...at least I do..:-)
[13:47] Mickorod Renard: what would happen if the west stopped buying from china?
[13:47] prez Allen: i think you are speaking like wind blow in the tree ;;;the problem isnt :europe ,usa or china
[13:48] Laila Schuman: what we are discussing are factors.... i am wondering if the real crux is not the overview... the view from afar... the one that can "guide" us in a direction
[13:48] Gudrun Odriscoll: China buys the West
[13:48] Osrum Sands: China would just buy the west
[13:48] prez Allen: the problem is the earth
[13:48] Ganymede Blackburn: The idea was, that the states that ran a surplus were just sa responsibel for economic imbalances as those running a deficit. one states surplus is another's deficit, after all.
[13:48] Stanley Aviatik: well China would only be buying back all it made! laughs
[13:48] Mickorod Renard: yes i see that gany,,hand in hand
[13:48] Ze Novikov: so debt is a neutral
[13:48] Osrum Sands: no resourceslike iron ore etc
[13:48] Gudrun Odriscoll: form of recycling, stan
[13:49] Mickorod Renard: most china stuff is crap anyway
[13:49] Cailleach Shan: Not like The Luck Country Os.
[13:49] Osrum Sands: china buying power plants etc
[13:49] Gudrun Odriscoll: I like fortune cookies
[13:49] Cailleach Shan: Lucky*
[13:49] Ze Novikov: lol
[13:49] Mickorod Renard: we may get back to buying quality
[13:50] Osrum Sands: Aus is lucky yes
[13:50] Osrum Sands: our bees are still healthy
[13:50] Cailleach Shan: lol so are ours in the South Island...
[13:50] Gudrun Odriscoll: workers or honey bees?
[13:50] Herman Bergson: Well, my friends, as we just saved world economics, I think we should return to our goal here
[13:50] Ze Novikov: lol
[13:50] Herman Bergson: and that is philosophy.
[13:50] Osrum Sands: hahah herman
[13:50] Gudrun Odriscoll: lol
[13:51] Scheimesu Demonia: i read this article on an idea about money that'd lose its value over time, so you had to spend it...
[13:51] Herman Bergson: tho the discussion was interesting and educating..:-)
[13:51] Ganymede Blackburn: One thing that is hard for many to swallow, is the fact that money only keeps it's value when it keeps circulating
[13:51] Mickorod Renard: under todays circumstances what would keynes have suggested?
[13:51] Ze Novikov: yes
[13:51] Gudrun Odriscoll: you are right, ganymede
[13:51] Gemma Cleanslate: hve to leave sorry!!:-)
[13:51] Cailleach Shan: cu Gem
[13:51] Gudrun Odriscoll: bye gemma
[13:51] Mickorod Renard: bye gem
[13:51] Ze Novikov: bb Gemma
[13:52] Ganymede Blackburn: Bye, Gemma. :)
[13:52] Osrum Sands: as I was saying Gany confidence and fear
[13:52] Mickorod Renard: hi rodney
[13:52] Rodney Handrick: Hi Mick
[13:52] Scheimesu Demonia: i think i have to leave too.
[13:52] Cailleach Shan: Hey Rodney
[13:52] prez Allen: the occidental nations are making product ,pollution and the china too ,yu will never understand that the humans are nothing in the time scale ,the planet dont need humans to live
[13:52] Rodney Handrick: Hi Cal
[13:53] Gudrun Odriscoll: bye sheimesu
[13:53] Herman Bergson: hello Rodney
[13:53] Rodney Handrick: Hi Herman
[13:53] Herman Bergson: Bye Scheimesu
[13:53] Osrum Sands: hot one prez
[13:53] Scheimesu Demonia: maybe i'll be back before it's over. later!
[13:53] Sevda Boa is Online
[13:53] Gudrun Odriscoll: prez it does not need humans to live, nevertheless it is nice to live on it for us humans
[13:54] prez Allen: for how long?
[13:54] Herman Bergson: We will leave all this materialism behind and pay our attention to a group of philosophers of life next time
[13:54] Osrum Sands: particularly here in Qld Aus
[13:54] Vladimir Apparatchik: It was keynes who said that in the long run we are all dead
[13:54] Qwark Allen: :-D
[13:54] Cailleach Shan: @ Prez. So enjoy the now.
[13:54] Herman Bergson: The first one will be Kierkegaard
[13:54] Osrum Sands: Be here Now
[13:54] Gudrun Odriscoll: in the short run we might be dead, too
[13:54] Qwark Allen: cya later
[13:54] Qwark Allen: ty herman
[13:54] Gudrun Odriscoll: by Qwark
[13:54] prez Allen: now is the past not the future
[13:54] Qwark Allen: very interesting like allways
[13:54] Alarice Beaumont: ah you mentioned Kierkegaard several times.. didn't you Herman?
[13:55] Herman Bergson: Ok...Gudrun, but not before we have completed our 100 List, I hope
[13:55] Gudrun Odriscoll: I am sure the comet will come down later
[13:55] Mickorod Renard: bye anyone that just said they are going
[13:56] Osrum Sands: Ah this group makes me both think and laugh
[13:56] Osrum Sands: its all good
[13:56] Ze Novikov: Bye everyone...
[13:56] Herman Bergson: Bye Ze..
[13:56] Herman Bergson: Class is dismissed..:-)
[13:56] Stanley Aviatik: thanks Herman - I hope that comet avoids the philosophty class!
[13:56] Mickorod Renard: bye ze
[13:56] Gudrun Odriscoll: bye ze, yes this is nice, thinking and laughing
[13:56] Wyeth Bailey: thanks all, always a valuable hour to jump start the brain with a group of smart people
[13:56] Ze Novikov is Offline
[13:56] Vladimir Apparatchik: I still dont really understand how Keynes is an influence on philosophy - important for economics yes, and a key figure in liberalism, but cant see what else frankly
[13:56] Osrum Sands: not enough of both in the world today
[13:56] Ganymede Blackburn: Then you should enjoy the next lecture, Osrum. Kierkegaard had a delightful sense of humor, imo. :)
[13:56] Gudrun Odriscoll: by herman, thanks so much, was great as ever
[13:57] Mickorod Renard: bye wyeth
[13:57] Laila Schuman: i need to run... family waiting... ... eveyone have a good... couple of days...til we meet againnnnnnnn
[13:57] Stanley Aviatik: bye all!
[13:57] Laila Schuman: baiee
[13:57] Gudrun Odriscoll: agree osrum
[13:57] Wyeth Bailey: bye Mich, herman, bye all
[13:57] Samuel Okelly: thanks again herman :) once again lots to think about :)
[13:57] Gudrun Odriscoll: bye laila, enjoy family
[13:57] Laila Schuman is Offline
[13:57] Alarice Beaumont: thanks Herman.. bye..:-)
[13:57] Samuel Okelly: tc every1 :)
[13:57] Mickorod Renard: bye again anyone who is going
[13:57] Herman Bergson: Bye evryone..:-)
[13:57] Osrum Sands: I am constantly excited by the vast range of knowledge and wisdom gathered in this small group
[13:57] Gudrun Odriscoll: by everybody, see you soon
[13:58] Herman Bergson: yes Osrum..it is remarkable
[13:58] Osrum Sands: shows the wonder and value of getting people from the globe together
[13:58] Mickorod Renard: Os ,,your humour is remarkable
|
|
No comments:
Post a Comment