From: "Harvey Newstrom" <mail@HarveyNewstrom.com>
> > > My fear is that any system that destroys groups for incorrect
> > thinking will
> > > quickly turn on us!
> >
> > That doesn't sound like much to be afraid of. A system that
> > destroys groups
> > for incorrect thinking (in the extremely unlikely event that such a system
> > ever emerges) would have my full support. In fact, I'd form a group around
> > such a system.
>
> But who decides what is correct thinking?
When you wrote "a system" I thought you meant "a system" -- not a group of
people.
When Galileo had his run-in with the Pope, the system that determined whose
thinking was incorrect was scientific methodology and reason. A system that
accurately identifies incorrect thinking as well as or better than
conventional science and rationalism would be the kind of system I'd support.
Or, to test if thinking is incorrect, look at its results. Incorrect thinking
is that which doesn't work. Come to think of it, we already have a system that
can identify incorrect thinking... it's called science.
©¿©¬
Stay hungry,
--J. R.
Useless hypotheses, etc.:
consciousness, phlogiston, philosophy, vitalism, mind, free will, qualia,
analog computing, cultural relativism, GAC, Cyc, Eliza, and ego.
Everything that can happen has already happened, not just once,
but an infinite number of times, and will continue to do so forever.
(Everything that can happen = more than anyone can imagine.)
We won't move into a better future until we debunk religiosity, the most
regressive force now operating in society.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:39:57 MDT