Re: virus: Faith - Brodiesque style
Tue, 9 Mar 1999 12:33:32 EST

In a message dated 3/9/99 8:15:46 AM Central Standard Time, writes:

<< I assume that you are indicating me. That is always a possibility that I consider. I would suggest, my gentle dismayed friend, that it is more likely that there are two of us that lack internal consistency in the practice of our
ideals. However one of us does so deliberately and intentionally by holding "articles of faith" that are in principle not subjectable to rational criticism. The other may do so unintentionally by failing to completely put into practice what he holds in principle.>>

Which is worse? Setting standards that you know you will probably never completely achieve, or lowering your principles until they are easily achievable?

A fideist indignantly calling a pancritical rationalist a hypocrite is such an easy sport. It's like putting regular feed out for a deer, and then one day deciding to "hunt" it with a high powered rifle from afar, and claiming it as a "trophy". But try outrunning a strange one on foot as a human with only a knife - in IT'S world on IT'S terms. It's like trying to fight evolution itself.

As long as you are on YOUR terms of faith, where you don't feel any reason to engage your assumptions at all, it is such a pointless endeavor to attack a pancritical rationalist. To make it remotely meaningful, you have to become one yourself, at least for a short time.

Bye for now.