virus: Re: Virus Symptoms Lesson #1 (W1)

David Rosdeitcher (
04 Mar 97 20:34:47 EST

I wrote:
>asking if there are points of view that are not points of view. Such a
>does not deserve an answer.

James Wright wrote:
>Faced with a question that points out a glaring deficiency in an
>axiomatic system, the respondent reflexes back to the axioms, cannot
>reconcile the deficiency, and winds up concluding that the question is
>nonsensical, and therefore does not deserve an answer, which relieves the
>deficiency - but only for the holder of the circular axiomatic system.

>Here's another circularly axiomatic response to an assertion questioning
>a circularly axiomatic system:

James--that response of "that doesn't deserve an answer" was like a combination
of thought contagion and a "take-off" joke about how Tad said "stop asking silly
questions"--I went a bit too far and didn't really mean it. And true, there is a
common objectivist behavior, which I don't necessarily agree with, of walking
away from questions that appear nonsensical.
I have a couple of questions for you. You mentioned the book, The 3 Pillars of
Zen by Kapleau. I once was in a bookstore and glanced through that book, reading
bits and pieces and remembered there was a relevant comment about a state of
mind that has no "point of view". If that is a possibility, who is there to hold
or experience that "point of view" or "state of mind"? Another question: I have
not read that particular book, but both you and Robin both agreed that I don't
understand Buddhism. What are you basing that assumption on? BTW, if you can
show me a deficiency in the objectivist axiomatic system, I'd love to see it.