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.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E who wrote (37951)	5/11/1999 7:59:00 PM
From: Chuzzlewit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

Exactly! Bergh takes it as axiomatic because Rand says it's the case. Isn't that the hallmark of religion? You blindly accept the pronouncements of a prophet. Conditions change. Population densities increase causing pollution, overcrowding, global warming, etc. All of these objective realities did not exist tens of thousands of years ago. Furthermore, our imperfect understanding of the world evolves as we learn more about our environment and physiology and psychology. Old views are challenged and discarded in the face of new evidence. Bergh's is a naive utopian view where all is known at the outset, and thus the need for change is obviated. Since Bergh is a true believer he cannot be expected to alter his view regardless of any evidence we may marshal because altering his viewpoint even one iota is inconsistent with immutable objective reality. The slightest concession of fact or interpretation is a betrayal of his philosophy. That's why skepticism is so much healthier -- it allows us to change our views without being accused of philosophical heresy. TTFN, CTC