> Amazon also lists your reviews as being "from Sioux Falls, SD", by the
> way.
I was well aware of this.
> Pity. I guess there's no point now in implementing the rest of my master
> plan.
This has taught me a valuable lesson, however- having a distinctive name (as
well as distinctive handles) is a double-edged sword. You sacrifice
anonymity for uniqueness.
> Your birthday is also listed in the #babygoth data, by the way, and one of
> the neqroteqh email addresses was used by an "Anton MacDonald" for some
> posts. (I'd actually managed to miss your earlier post in which you'd
> explained that "nicq" was short for "Nicholas".)
Yup. As I guessed.
> Just making your life a little more surreal.
Thank you- you had me going for a little while. I was trying to guess where
you pulled Anton out of, at the very least- but you were totally off
regarding my relationship with my mother, unless you consider chemistry sets
and the "Sim" game series "macho toys".
> I have a couple of other comments on things you said or thought at some
> point during your entire lifespan: There is a difference between
> rationality and rationalization.
Agreed.
> There are people who can "prove anything
> with logic", who use their intelligence simply for justifying what they
> already want to believe, but this itself is not an intelligent act, at
> least not if done deliberately. Those who fail to understand this are the
> script kiddies of rationality. You have not achieved proficiency in logic
> until logic can tell you something you didn't expect to hear - until logic
> is dictating to you, and not the other way around. I judge moral
> philosophies the same way; you have not achieved proficiency in morality
> until your philosophy takes over and tells you something you don't want to
> hear. Of course, that doesn't mean that just telling you *anything*
> unpleasant means you're doing things right... but if all you hear is what
> you want to hear, you'll never get anywhere.
I'll agree with that as well.
> (Judging proficiency in
> logic is rather easier; logical reasoning has to tell you something that
> you didn't start out expecting, and then the logic also has to be right.)
> One of the reasons I don't like magic-based philosophies, and
> nihilism-based moralities, is that they appear to have no capability to be
> used in a way that surprises the user. Personally, in addition to the
> Nicolai Kingsley stories, I think you should also read "The Moral
> Animal". (You can skip "Engines of Creation", since you've read that
> already. Sorry! Just backsliding for a moment.)
I just added it to my reading list. Thanks for the recommendation.
> At least some of the
> better magical philosophies prescribe mental training, awareness of
> awareness and the like - and I know you believe that's what's important,
> not the rituals - which tune abilities that can sometimes be turned to far
> more powerful disciplines, such as evolutionary-psychology-augmented
> self-awareness. But I advise you to start soon, since you're running out
> of time.
I'm well aware of the time constraints- as far as I'm concerned, I have
twelve years to complete my training for whatever comes next. Of course, I
may have more or less time- but I'm not going to push it too far. It's time
for me to get to work.
-Nicq MacDonald
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:50:36 MDT