This is an apt analogy, "Jake", maybe more than you realize. You are
choosing to be that deer, and in the real world people really do have
high-powered rifles.
Richard Brodie richard@brodietech.com http://www.brodietech.com/rbrodie/
http://www.brodietech.com/rbrodie/meme.htm
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-virus@lucifer.com [mailto:owner-virus@lucifer.com]On Behalf
Of MemeLab@aol.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 9, 1999 9:34 AM
To: virus@lucifer.com
Subject: Re: virus: Faith - Brodiesque style
In a message dated 3/9/99 8:15:46 AM Central Standard Time, MemeLab@aol.com
writes:
<< I assume that you are indicating me. That is always a possibility that I
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
As long as you are on YOUR terms of faith, where you don't feel any reason
to
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.
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
Bye for now.
-Jake