Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : VOLTAIRE'S PORCH-MODERATED -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jill who wrote (19339)	11/25/2000 2:18:28 PM
From: bela_ghoulashi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 65232

Jill: On first glance, and without composing a long essay in response, Bland's subjective opinion is that Weinberg is swinging at shadows, jousting with ghosts, arguing with the past. He is constructing a Deity of his own convenient devising from his own subjective interpretations of what other men have said and believed, only to demolish it himself based on arguments shot through with his own subjective value judgements. Ultimately, genius or not, he is arguing with himself and no one else. His positions are clearly suffused with and shaped by painful emotional residues, no matter how he tries to pretend otherwise. He is reacting against something, first and foremost. He is following the same pattern of thinking and behavior as a man of science as those men of religion of ages past followed: destroy the old idols in favor of the new. Supplant dogma with dogma. Fight polemics with polemics. He is arguing to console himself, to slay his own private demons...just as were those who proceeded him on the other side of the battle. The true nature of the universe remains unknowable, unknown, and unaffected by gossip: "So there seems to be an irreducible mystery that science will not eliminate." Personally bland is not persuaded by anything so much as by what he sees and experiences for himself. Bland cannot presume to understand or explain the purpose of life to anyone, he can simply say that in all of its manifestations life exhibits intelligent, purposeful activity. That is its hallmark, its most significant and identifiable trait. Just because bland cannot identify what that ultimate, overriding purpose may be is no argument there is none. Bland believes the limitation exists in himself, in the poverty of his concepts, in the limited range of his ability to perceive, in the utter inadequacy of his vocabulary, as he has said before. Ultimately, it is not about arguing or proving anything to anybody. It is what we live within us within sight or view of no one but ourselves and the eternity or nothingness we must finally partake of.