In a message dated 2/16/99 3:42:33 PM Central Standard Time,
richard@brodietech.com writes:
<<First of all I want you to know that I like you. I appreciate your
willingness to show yourself honestly in front of the group. Thank you.
Now a poke at you.
How many minutes does your philosophy of rational criticism allow you to
consider something before deciding that it is worthless? >>
Oh man. Well, I guess if I dish it out, I gotta take the dishing back.
Seriously though, I think you take my "arrogance" for more than
"Arrogance" is for my growing annoyance at too much intellectual PC behavior: where everybody gets to have "their own truths" and "their own realities"; any assertions are considered equal to any other assertions; and any attempt to rationally criticize somebody else's idea is seen as an act of oppression and unenlightenment.
And while I am very interested in "memes" and any future "memetics" that may develop, I have sensed that some fascinated with this metaphor are more interested in the spread of ideas, and in spreading their own ideas, than they are in assessing these ideas for real meaning and the actual value of these meanings. And while <tolerance> is a healthy thing to cultivate in moderation, and it certainly does have a tendency to lubricate the spread of ideas, something that I know fascinates the readership here, there is a point where it becomes unhealthy especially when valued more than rational thought.
>> If it's not limited to a few then I would encourage you to chew on what
Reed said for a week or so and see if you can make some sense of it.<<
Despite the impairments that rationality has imposed on my thinking processes,
and the enlightenment that I lack due to its crippling effects, I can still
intutively grasp at what Reed has said. I don't think that it will take me a
week. Even in my mentally impaired - oops I mean challenged - state, I think
I vaguely understood it in the first read, and the light started to shine
dimly on the 25th read. That took a while, since I have to say the words out
loud slowly.
In short, I think Reed has painted the same "logic nazi" picture of me that
you have, complete with vivid imaginings about my supposed authoritarian
pecking-order anxieties - where I sit around and anguish about whether I am
indeed THE Ueber Mensch, or just the Ueber Mensch's used condom.
Now aside from these vivid images which I am sure are infecting
I have liberally disseminated the following two links which mirror some
http://www.law.mita.keio.ac.jp/~sehagi/kogawara3.html
and
Pancritical Rationalism http://www.extropy.org/pcr.htm
Though those certainly aren't my complete thoughts on the matter, they do make
a good introduction.
Honestly though, I did find it amusing how Reed managed to depict truth and
rationality as such horrible, oppressive forces. That jumped out at me on my
Just for you, Brodie, I will read Reed's most insightful post again. But I
would suggest that Reed give my stuff more than the cursory few minutes that I
-Jake