Brian Atkins wrote:
>Well that's the real catch isn't it? I just don't see how you can logically
>say that simultaneously you disagree with certain parts of a philosophy
>yet still call yourself a member of it? Is that like calling yourself a
>catholic and then having an abortion when it suits you?
>
While I agree with some of what you have said, I do balk at the idea of an
"all or nothing" philosophy such as you apparently suggest. As Natasha and
Nadia both touched on, it is the constant influx of challenging ideas that
keeps a philosophy such as Extropianism healthy and growing. This is the
same reason why the philosophy of Objectivism has not grown in the last few
decades...there is no room or desire for new ideas and growth.
While I must admit that I personally agree with all the Extropian
Principles and have been an ExI member for a number of years, I have no
desire to close the door on other viewpoints which may not explicitly fit
the philosophy or support the principles. I would, however, like to see
most people who call themselves "Extropian" become actual members. It is a
relatively cheap way of putting one's money where one's mind is.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
E. Shaun Russell Extropian, Musician, ExI Member,
e_shaun@uniserve.com Moderator of NWExtropians list
==================== http://www.egroups.com/group/NWExtropians
Hear my music at: http://www.mp3.com/eshaunrussell
Read my poetry at: http://www.therecord.net/e_shaun
--------------------------------------------------------------------
<K I N E T I C I Z E Y O U R P O T E N T I A L>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:12:52 MDT