Skeptic's Dictionary & CRIT (was Re: Skeptics Take on the

Michael M. Butler (butler@comp*
Sat, 28 Feb 1998 06:31:25 -0800

At 05:05 PM 2/27/98 -0500, you wrote:
>[ I wish to stress that this message's sole intent is
>to make people reflect about the way certain aspects of
>the Extropy Institute are operated. Its intent is not
>to flame. After writing it I realized that it might invoke
>strong reactions from some people. Its intent is to
>represent constructive criticism. ]

>I'm guessing that the the Skeptic's Dictionary won't hold
>the Extropy Institute ("ExI") in too favorable a light.

Do I detect an invalid hypothesis here? Is it your view that the author of
the Skeptic's Dictionary is somehow a particularly competent critic? Or
that this one guy, or even CSICOP, is somehow possessed of great influence
over <much?> <popular?> consciousness?

This one guy calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg, any more than one
dork's ad hominem Scientific American article transforms K. Eric Drexler
into Mr. Peabody.

Have you heard of the CRIT engine? If this guy posts something stupid about
anything you care about, it's grist for that mill, you know.

"Never apologize, never explain"--but don't be a cad or a bounder.

I agree that others' perceptions of one directly affect how effective one
can be in many situations.

But as one Extropian's mother once said, "What do you care what people think?"

Pussyfooting around and aggressive spin management get interpreted as
spooky and cultish too.


"The highest love [is] uniquely human,
the product of compassion and liberty;
not one at the expense of the other."
-- L. A. Chu and M. M. Butler

(RU a bot? If not, be advised *s are flagged as 'net address ERRORS;
MY address is thus munged. Kindly hyphenate. "Go team, beat SP*M.")