From: Dr. Rich Artym (rartym@galacta.demon.co.uk)
Date: Sun Sep 01 1996 - 15:46:05 MDT
In message <199608281542.IAA12605X0@primenet.com>, Natasha V. More writes:
> I stated months ago that I thought UIF was, perhaps, sloopy
> in its authorship. It's original purpose, so to speak, was mutated. Thus,
> my intent was to drop UIF and develop another way of viewing my individual
> freedoms.
Well, "sloppy in its authorship" is a bit hard. Admittedly, you coined
the phrase but didn't define the concept, but that isn't necessarily
sloppy. You left it to the rest of us on the >H list to define it, and
that was surely good for the subject matter and for the community. Our
work didn't take the path you expected, it took the path that those that
worked on it determined, which can't be a surprise to anyone.
If you want an ideology that meets your own requirements exactly, I'm
afraid you're going to have to develop it yourself, Natasha! (:-)
> Rich added much to the phrase, carefully developing his view of its purpose,
> and Peter and Greg also did much work on it. To my knowledge there was much
> disagreement regarding its objectivity and/or subjectivity. This was a
> problem for me, thus my continued search for a phrase that I could identify
> with because I found myself somewhere between their views - but leaning more
> towards Peter and Greg's summation.
For the benefit of those that didn't follow the numerous threads on
this subject over many many months on the other list, the disagreement
over direction was resolved in a manner totally in keeping with the
spirit of UIF: I placed the form of UIF in which all value judgements
are entirely subjective into my personal memetic pigeonhole labouring
under a banner of "TransIndividualism" (>I), a totally individualistic
ideology based on scientific empiricism on the objective side plus an
axiomatic base of TransIndividualistic Freedom (>IF) on the subjective
side. This has extended my freedom while not reducing that of others.
(The only downside is that it leaves my tongue in knots. :-)
That left the label "UIF" available for redefinition by those that did
not feel comfortable with a world in which there can be no objectivity
in matters of value judgement. As it happens, nobody has picked up that
gauntlet yet, which is a great pity --- I'd love to debate it.
Rich.
-- ########### Dr. Rich Artym ================ PGP public key available # galacta # Email : rich@galacta.demon.co.uk 158.152.156.137 # ->demon # Web : http://www.galacta.demon.co.uk 194.222.245.150 # ->ampr # AMPR : rich@g7exm[.uk].ampr.org 44.131.164.1 BBS:GB7MSW # ->NTS # Fun : Unix, X, TCP/IP, kernel, O-O, C++, SoftEng, Nano ########### More fun: Regional IP Coordinator Hertfordshire + N.London
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:35:44 MST