From: Samantha Atkins (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Fri Feb 15 2002 - 02:15:18 MST
Mike Lorrey wrote:
> WW3 was a contest of mass mediocrity versus exceptional excellence,
> stick versus carrot.
> WW4 is the final contest between reason and faith. As the side of
> reason, we are at an automatic disadvantage in that most of us are not
> so convinced of ourselves that we would be willing to do anything to
> win. Those on the side of faith are so convinced of themselves.
False. Many "on the side of faith" are every bit as doubtful or
uncertain as any of those "on the other side". I don't find
your notion compelling.
> At its core, all world wars have been over which is superior: lies
> versus truth. First you had the imperialism lie versus the human liberty
> truth, second you had the racism lie versus the humanism truth, thirdly
> you had the socialism lie versus the free market truth, and finally you
> have the lie of religion versus the truth of reason, science, and
Reason, science and technology are not fully adequate to deal
with all important aspects of life. As long as this is true,
and much more capable folks than me have said so and issued
better arguments than I can make here, There is no reason to
claim or implie that all truth is sole possessed by the above
trio. At least through in a bit of philosophy. And where did
ethics, aesthetics and so on go?
Perhaps the next war will be between those who want simple
cut-and-dried pigeonholes of what is what and those who realize
that the "truth" is more ambiguous, deeper and more wonderful
> Countries would not go to war against each other if one side or the
> other were not lying about their point of view.
Uh huh. No countries come to blows over honest and clearly
expressed conflicts of interests?
> In this faith versus reason war, you have various faiths: in god, in
> power, in a romantic vision of some arcadian or andelusian period, a
> golden age in the past.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 13:37:39 MST