While I normally grant almost all posters to the extropian list
a huge grain of salt, I must state that IMO the article by David
Selbourne was entirely useless.
It was nothing more than a rundown of a position based on opinions
unsubstantiated by facts.
Islam, Catholicism, Hinduism, Buddism, etc. are faiths based
on the "blind" belief of one reality over another. Since they
are cannot be subjected to scientific debate, they are useless
from an extropian perspective.
>From the Extropian Principles Section 7:
> Extropians affirm reason, critical inquiry, intellectual independence,
> and honesty. We reject blind faith and the passive, comfortable
> thinking that leads to dogma, conformity, and stagnation.
While you might make a small case that it was useful based on
the expression of an opposing position, we know the world is
dominated by "opposing" positions and so one more cob in a
field of corn does not significantly advance the discussion.
If you can point out a *useful* extropic point in the Selbourne
article, I'm willing to look at it.
But if NOT -- NOTICE IS SERVED -- I'm in the Anders camp --
CONSUMING THE BANDWIDTH OF THE EXTROPIAN LIST, particularly with
reposts of people presumably unaware of our principles, IS UNEXTROPIC --
EXPECT ME TO CALL YOU A DIMWITTED NIMKOMPOOP IN PUBLIC FOR DOING SO.
ENGAGE YOUR BRAIN BEFORE YOU ENGAGE YOUR FINGERS.
(And feel free to plonk me if I'm so stupid as to do so.)
If you want to form ExI-Related-News or ExI-Unextropic-News
*then* recruit the support of the board, get those lists started
and issue yourself a permit for policing those topics that
belong in one forum or another. *We* control the dials on
our television sets -- *we* must learn to use them (taking
a page from the "Outer Limits" operating proceedures handbook...).
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat May 11 2002 - 17:44:12 MDT