In a message dated 2/23/99 4:34:05 AM Central Standard Time, kjseelna@students.wisc.edu writes:
<< Are you suffering from a serious identity crisis? I thought you were "Jake". Please don't let the whole "Uber Mensch" thing go to your head. It seems like you're taking the issue a bit too seriously.
You're both bickering over abstractions here...isn't it alright to accept having different opinions? No one has to win or lose.
Peace, man...
~kjs>>
This is very interesting. I do something a little creative, responding intuitively to the many vivid images that Reed conjures up about his past and what he thinks he sees in many of us here, by creating the persona of "Logic Nazi". I figure its a welcome break from "usual long boring passages of haughty, textbook-like speech". I get taken to task for it. I am "way to serious", or I am suffering from an "identity crisis". Reed takes an off the wall tangent, and he gets praised by you. This is a very interesting double standard. I can only guess the values that went into constructing it.
Indeed, I have been suggesting for quite some time that that we can agree to disagree. If I recall correctly, it is Reed that thinks we should all agree that some manifestations of faith are GOOD, not just tolerable, but good. He gets quite upset when we won't agree with him on this. He thinks it is his duty to "close the gap" between rationalists and people of faith, citing some amorphous "universal human goals" which he refuses to describe that we are supposed to be all working toward. I am quite happy to live and let live, and have no desire for this philosophical union with all of humanity that Reed thinks we should be pursuing.
-Jake