From: Thom Quinn (swo@execpc.com)
Date: Tue Mar 31 1998 - 22:31:51 MST
Yeah, that's right, I can't read. You got my number. In fact, I have a
team of monkeys here randomly hitting keys, hopefully, I will get an
email message out soon. Or maybe they will finish Hamlet for me soon.
I have met many Secular Humanists and not one of them was using it as a
euphemism! That proves it, I'm right, you're wrong! Actually, that would
be a silly way to go about it. I was just pointing out that your comment
was not a fair way to characterize humanism. You should try some
scientific method which does not allow one to use such "personal" off
the cuff observations as evidence to support claims. Have you ever heard
of the science method? Of course you have. Just as I can read. I was not
jumping on your back, why did you feel it necessary to stomp on mine?
You just were making it sound like Secular Humanism was philosophically
a "weak straw man" which is identical to atheism. This would not be a be
a far criticism. It is like then people characterize transhumanism as
science fiction that is confused about reality.
Also, I just wondering what this meant:
(I only went through this exercise because you countered an
> earlier post of someone else's by not responding to his actual
> content but to what you thought you read.)
What did I counter wrong? Maybe I did, but what are you talking about?
If I did, I am sorry to whomever I did that too. I try not to post items
to newsgroups if I do not understand the topic.
Thom Quinn
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:48:50 MST