From: Phil Osborn (philosborn2001@yahoo.com)
Date: Sun Jun 09 2002 - 21:15:06 MDT
From: Lee Corbin (lcorbin@tsoft.com)
Date: Sat Jun 08 2002 - 14:16:42 MDT
>>Harvey (?)> Why criticize the Extropian Principles
once again?
>In Pan Critical Rationalism, as you know, criticism
is seen as a good thing. Indeed, I often talk to two
of my friends for the primary purpose of soliciting
criticism of my beliefs. "Criticize this!" is a
frequent challenge I jokingly throw down, doing a
funny-funny on the movie title "Analyze This!".
As John Grigg pointed out, one reason that the
Principles seem so bullet-proof, (and people have a
hard time finding anything to quarrel with) is that
they've been subjected to intense criticism over the
years. >
ARGGGH! You're stealing my lines! There are many
reasons to criticize everything... Not only is it the
only way to defend validity over time - in fact, THE
method of proof is thru showing that denying the
conclusion requires denying one of the premises (that
we know to be true). Furthermore, it is incredibly
useful at smoking out religious, irrational, fanatical
ideas and individuals addicted to related memes. (Just
look how often Samantha jumps in. If Sam didn't
exist, someone would have to simulate her.)
I personally use a ZEN approach. If there is
something that I don't want to consider or find
particularly abhorent, then I will take the time to
make sure that I DO consider that thing. I know that
for some people locked in their safe little straight
jackets with the blackout lenses this may seem truly
scarey - but then, what is FEAR?! FEAR is just an
EMOTION! WOW - just a bunch of robotic chemicals
telling me over and over - DANGER, Phil Osborn,
DANGER. Should I run, when I have rationally assessed
the situation and determined that it's all just in my
head? I should take note and proceed to ferrit out
why, right?
Anyway, I guess I ought to contribute something
positive to the rant: So, here's the skinny on the
hot local news and how it relates to the above thread.
Locally - Kalifornia: A new law has been introduced by
some legislator that will require businesses to
provide up to 12 weeks of PAID leave - to be paid for
from a fund that ALL employees and their employer will
be forced to contribute to 50/50 - to care for a sick
relative. Of course, if YOU are your only relative,
then you are SOL, but you will still be charged.
More locally - Orange County, KA: Some jerk has been
placing sharp objects in playground sand for the past
year or two - rasors, blade up at the foot of the
slides, etc. Anyway, the cops arrested the alleged
perp last week, and it turned out to be a 20 year old
caucasian woman who worked for the INS. (Just trying
to keep up with the news services here - the local
papers dedicated a full page for three days running to
analysing this poor, unfortunate, obviously conflicted
young lady, and what social forces might have forced
her to do such a terrible thing.)
However, none of that is the point. RU listening,
Sam? One of the first responses by officialdom was by
the Major of Mission Viejo, who made a comment to the
effect that - "Well, I suppose most people were just
shocked to hear that it was a young woman..." I
wondered why she didn't add "and WHITE, too." My
feelings were obviously shared by other misbegotten
souls, as one published reader's letter to the
Register the following day echoed exactly my internal
commentary.
So? The point, Phil? Well, note that the Major
didn't say that SHE was shocked. She only said that
perhaps other people were shocked that it was...
I.e., here I was guilty of the same jumping of the gun
that I continually criticize the PC crowd for. So
easy to fall into that trap.
A few weeks ago, some local high-school English Lit
teacher wrote an op-ed for the Register on the subject
of censorship in the classroom. She focused on the
effort to delete Huckleberry Finn from the reading
curriculum, solely because of the use of "nigger."
(Actually, I think I had to infer that, as I seem to
recall she lacked the moral courage to use the actual
term, substituting "the N-word." Anyway, she did make
the point that HF is perhaps - and I would agree - the
most powerful single anti-racist novel in the world.
But that doesn't matter to the PC crowd. The whole
point is to control what people are allowed to say.
"Nigger" is the nose of the camel. No one except
stupid, vicious racists calls someone by a racist
term. I would get upset to hear someone use "nigger"
or any other similar term to refer to anyone. But
that's not the point. The point is to say that I
can't even quote from HF, or use the term in a
discussion of nasty, stupid racial slurs - because I
am white.
When Atlanta whites put together a large NG volunteer
effort a few years back to bring tutoring and skill
building classes to the lower income black community,
the lady interviewing one of the spokespersons for
national TV had the utter gall to start criticizing
them for condescending. Their whole effort to try to
- as they put it - the sins of the past was worthless
because they were white. What should they have done?
Obviously, they should have gone to the local black
leaders, that is, the progressive black power
"leaders" who had succeeded in turning back half of
the gains of the civil rights movement to build and
maintain their power base, and asked them what they
should do.
More later...
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:14:42 MST