Brian D Williams wrote:
> Actually Mr Heston represents the opposite of a number of
> viewpoints, in this particular case he was arguing against those
> advocates of censorship known as "politically correct".
Thanks for the clarification.
> >And why this obsession with sides?
> The oldest trick in the debating handbook is to accuse the other
> side of something and force them to defend. Obsession? Sorry you'll
> have to produce evidence, not opinion on this.
You're right. My use of the word "obsession" here was too strong, and
potentially inflammatory. Sorry. I was probably reacting more to what I
see as an unhealthy tendency on this list toward side-taking and us vs.
them posturing, rather than solid critical thinking, when it comes to
dealing with certain touchy political topics.
> >How does this fit in with "onward and upward"? I see conflicting
> >viewpoints being embraced here.
> I'm missing the conflicting viewpoint you're talking about. By
> insisting on free speech, not merely politically correct speech is
> completely aplicable to the extropian principals.
I was trying (not very successfully, apparently) to point out how I see
side-taking or thinking in oppositional terms to be anti-progess:
backward thinking, not forward thinking. This seems to conflict with
extropian thought. I was questioning your rhetorical methods, not the
content of the thing you were responding to.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:56:46 MDT