From: Brett Paatsch (paatschb@ocean.com.au)
Date: Wed Jan 08 2003 - 20:20:58 MST
Samantha wrote:
> Lee Corbin wrote:
> > Brett explains why a number of careful thinkers go ballistic
> > when they hear the word "belief". I had always wondered about
> > that.
> >
> >>[Some people] have not yet separated themselves from
> >>superstition and when they stick their uncritical,
> >>unweighted, propositions in each others faces they
> >>do so proclaiming all too often, all too proudly,
> >>as though it were a great virtue in itself,
> >>"this is what I BELIEVE !".
> >
> > It is perhaps significant that I don't ever recall anyone using
> > the word in this manner, and I have even entertained a number
> > of religionists who've knocked at the door. That is *so*
> > mindless, that perhaps it's a vanishing usage.
[Samantha]
> Perhaps we can upgrade even the uncritical to say, "this is my
> working hypothesis!" :-)
>
It is a nice thought :-)
And I *like* the alternative wording. A pity that it's so verbose.
The extra work and thought load is perhaps analogous to the
effort that is require to use gender neutral language. Its a pain to
have to say "she or he" using three words when previously one
would have done but a lot of folk seem to have accepted the
argument that the effort is worth it to move toward less gender
biased language.
And seriously, I wouldn't want to coerce them. I hope they'll
come around of their own accord, persuaded by the over-
whelming logic, good sense and humanity of those extropians,
transhumanists and free thinkers whom they meet and who
counsel against the dangers of false certainty and point out
the anti-social nature of dogmatic belief.
After all, even those into "belief" in a big way, don't think
those who hold mutually exclusive "beliefs" to theirs, have an
equal claim to veracity.
Brett
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 15 2003 - 17:35:51 MST