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.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dayuhan who wrote (18037)	7/11/2001 11:04:37 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

The 300 million can, and frequently do, throw them out of their jobs Looking at the longevity of incumbancy, if you consider that "frequent" then you consider ice ages frequent global occurrances. Better stock up on parkas quick! Okay. I'm going to pause a moment here to claim a clear point of victory. You wrote in post 18012 "Religious law is regarded as absolute and immutable; change is regarded as heresy." When I challenged that, you promptly responded "It changes because it was not made by God. It was made by people ..." Okay. So you have now clearly admitted that your first statement was wrong. Sometimes it's important when a major point has been scored to point that out. One in my column. Now I'll get back to the substance of your message, in another post so as not to dilute the pleasure of this one. When I pointed

To: Dayuhan who wrote (18037)	7/11/2001 11:10:03 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Our attribution of these beliefs makes a key difference. Some of us believe that our personal beliefs are individual variations on flexible, dynamic themes developed by thousands of generations of humans, in an evolutionary process in which compromise and change are key elements. Some of us believe that our beliefs are absolute truths, revealed to somebody, somewhere by a supreme being. I hope you see a difference there. Actually I don't. You stopped one step short of going back far enough. You BELIEVE that your personal beliefs are based on evolutionary themes. That makes you feel superior to the person whose personal beliefs are based on faith in an unseeable unknowable being. But that's just a belief. Not provable, just a plain "this I believe because this I believe." No more, no less. Just the way the religious person, at bottom, has to say "this I believe becausse this I believe." You are both, when you go back far enough to first principles of your thinking, starting with the same statement. "There is something I believe simply and purely because I believe it. I can't prove it, I can't know it, I can't show its truth scientifically, I can't produce any experiment that will prove it's true. I believe it's true purely and simply because that's what I believe." It's exactly the same thing you each say. But they're really the same thing. You come back down to "this I believe, just because I believe it and for no other reason."