From: Lee Corbin (lcorbin@tsoft.com)
Date: Sat Oct 05 2002 - 22:29:45 MDT
In an extremely puzzling message, Peter writes
> [Lee writes]
>> However, the following *at least* are normally
>> furthered by such discussions:
>
>> For sure some think that this is all malarkey,
>
> It sure does. Your observations sound wildly
> inconsistent with what I recall observing, so
> it seems clear that at least one of us is not
> objectively observing how people behave during
> debates.
In my little essay I made five *claims*, see
http://www.extropy.org/exi-lists/extropians/1767.html
I'm not even sure what "it" refers to in your first
sentence. Perhaps you mean to say that you think
most of my five claims are preposterous? Would you
mind saying what is it about each claim you disagree
with?
>> and instead propose that we should all "just
>> get along", or that we "stop foolish disputing
>> and learn to be more rational and harmonious".
>
> Those sure sound like good goals to me, as long as
> the "be more rational" part implies we should achieve
> them by being more objective rather than more conformist.
I thought that I made it clear that while desirable,
those two "goals" ("just get along", "learn to be
more rational..."), are effectively nothing more than
platitudes.
One might as well spread the meme, "Be nice to others".
Won't do no fucking good, IMHO. Indeed I wrote
>> That such advice has proven ineffective for about
>> 40,000 years but still continues to be dispensed
>> is a mystery to me (but one doubtless falling under
>> the purview of point number 2 above).
to which you reply
> Yes, given the opinions you've been expressing about people's
> motivations, it's not surprising that it's a mystery to you.
It would be nice if you could offer a helpful
explanation. I guess that the mystery you are
referring to is my lack of understanding as to
why people repeat inane homilies (or so they
seem to me).
Also, I *sincerely* would appreciate criticism of my
opinions concerning people's motivations in general.
Apparently you've noticed some opinions I hold in this
regard that don't seem correct. I am quite serious in
needing to unearth so far as is possible the reasons
that I may misunderstand people's motivations, especially
as concerns "What is Accomplished by Debate".
Thanks,
Lee
P.S.
> I sure wish I could do something effective towards achieving
> those goals. Alas, the promising approaches appear to require
> skills I lack, such as the ability to persuade the appropriate
> regulators to approve real-money idea futures markets that
> would reward objectivity.
Good luck, of course, to you and to Chris Hibbert on
your efforts towards the acceptance of idea futures.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:17:25 MST