Claiming a win by just saying "Checkmate" is sort of pointless, don't
you think?
> course gets back to the fundamental critisim of Post-Structuralism and
> level 3. Why play by /any/ rules?
Because that's the only way to have fun.
> > If you want to use some other worldview for anything at all, be my guest.
> > If you find faith useful, that's fine with me too. If you're insulted because
> > I find faith fundamentally flawed and express those opinions (without attacking
> > anyone, BTW), then maybe you should ask yourself why you are so defensive.
>
> nasty nasty! Looks like an attack to me! But seriously, I think at
> about this point we should invoke the "Reed Principle" and step back...
I think you should ask yourself why that looks like an attack to you.
> What is the point of this argument? If you already accept that reason
> is "just" a world view, as you say, then the point has already been
The point of an argument is to learn. That is how both sides can win.
If you think I am just now realizing that logic is "just" a worldview,
then I suggest you go back and read what I wrote.
> won. The only struggle now lies in "faith", which you still reject.
> Tell me, if you do think that reason is not the be all and end all, what
> other world view /would/ you accept as valid?
Any worldview that is as good or better than reason. (I don't know
of any but that doesn't mean they don't or can't exist.)
-- David McFadzean david@lucifer.com Memetic Engineer http://www.lucifer.com/~david/ Church of Virus http://www.lucifer.com/virus/