Science, not Re: [FoRK] Brownback defines science
<tomhiggins at gmail.com> on
Sat Jun 2 11:45:42 PDT 2007
On 6/2/07, Stephen D. Williams <sdw at lig.net> wrote:
> Whew, what a messy thread. It seems that lack of specific context signals, i.e.
> one of our previous threads about non-religious leaders and "marketing" atheism
> (or rather the viability of the option of personally avoiding religion),
> confused the message. A certain style of writing (and thinking?) certainly
> seems to be off putting in our little society, even when the core ideas are
> points we would like to discuss.
Thats the piont though, the troll seeks to bait and then to capture.
It is amzing the thoughttime that goes into responding to and feeding
the troll. I hope other folks will cut off the food supply and look
for better threads to invest in.
> I think both of these are valid points and discussion articles, and I helped
> propose both of them weeks ago. Perhaps we can focus on these or other
> similarly proposed contexts. Tom, below, doesn't want to be a "used car
> salesman". I suppose that I can see that a general principle of "help other
> people" can translate into proselytizing my viewpoint, which I have worked to
> validate and refine, as much as religious people feel they are "saving" people
> when they proselytize.
That is a part of it, yes. I do not want to FORCE CONVERT or SAVE
anyone , that would make them weak and sheeple like. I would rather
they come to their own reasoned understanding on their own, with help
and support from the ideas and facts themsevles rather than being
lovebombed with a livestyle to wholesale apodt and conform to.
Journey/destination sort of thing.
The used car salesman aspect of todays mindsets are very very real and
a factor into why we have the sheeple mindset that plagues group
thought and action. Why think for yourself when you can just click
your heels three times and have all thoughts and decisions made for
you, not only that made for you such that you can focus on fighting
others why they are so wrong for not having clicked thier heels three
times when faced with the idea of thought or decision.
it has weakened the ability of thought and reason.
And hence we have tv preachers as political figures, science being
defined on how well it fits with a particular bible, pseudo
intellectuals pandering to the swayable with rhetoric riddled with
more holes than Rasputin's undies an even in otherwise reasoned places
the natterings of the ever shifting gas bags who are more into hearing
themselves blow with a mighty wind than join in on a meaningful
I think it is safe to say that going beyond any one religious
viewpoint, going past any ideologies or thoughtscapes...it is the
force of unreason that needs to be full on body checked in order to
stop the weakening of the very foundations that could get us out of so
many problems we face today.
So i do not see how being dishonest in giving a thought to others
helps in that, I do not see the value in being a slimy revisionist
aids in making things better nd i do not feel that aiding in the
spread of such anal leakage does anything but waste time and effort.
or has been so well put PLONK
More information about the FoRK