virus: False Paradigms

Reed Konsler (
Fri, 4 Apr 1997 18:37:40 -0500 (EST)

>From: "D. H. Rosdeitcher" <>
>Date: 03 Apr 97 17:23:40 EST

> There appears to be at CoV a silly agnosticism that is quite prevalent.
>Stuff like "Level 3","all truths are half-truths", "I don't know if there's a
>god",etc. get treated as objective, as if there is no difference between
>arbitrary assertions and legitimately supported assertions.

Again, we're comming down to standards of evidence. You have made
all kinds of explicitly unsupported assertions, and when called to defend
them have been unable to convince many that you can "legitimately"
support these statements. You percieve it as a problem inherent in the
audience. This is an "acceptible self-deceit" from a memetic perspective,
I guess.

What I'm trying to say is, I think you categorize things ex post facto as
"arbitrary" or "legitimate" depending on whether you see them as
supporting or refuting your personal version of Objectivism.

This is a kind of weak solpsism. You don't respect the cognitive/reflective
abilities of people who disagree with you enough to "try to see it from
their perspective". It strikes me that you are following an ideology of two

1) There is one path to wisdom/freedom/power/etc.
2) It is MY path.

>Pancritical rationalism and objectivism, paradigms in which truth is not
>absolute, get mixed up with false paradigms which claim that reality is not

I like this.


Reed Konsler