Re: virus: Pancritical rationality

Tony Hindle (
Mon, 7 Apr 1997 10:10:57 +0100

In message <>, David
McFadzean <> writes
>At 06:20 PM 03/04/97 +0100, Tony Hindle wrote:
>>I see, you are refusing to accept any axioms whatsoever. This makes
>>sense to me.
>Not quite. Axioms can be accepted, and even strongly believed to the
>point where you're betting your life on them. But they are always
>provisional. That is the difference.
Ok. That's what I meant. I have just looked up axiom and
realised I never really properly understood what it meant.
>>>Unlike Objectivism, Extropian thought has never claimed to be either
>>>complete or closed. On the contrary, embodied in the guiding Principles
>>>(version-numbered to help ward off stagnation) we find the imperative to
>>>continually self-criticize, reevaluate, and revise.
Version numbered principles remind me of the game of Nomad
(hofstadter). Its a good way of summarising "what is truth." Giving
version numbers to the answers implicitly says there are no
absolute truths (or at least if there are we wont ever know if we
have found them).
>>this sounds like what I assumed cov was all about.
>Quite so. In fact the CoV was strongly influenced by Max More's
>presentation on pancritical rationalism at Extro-1.

BTW. I have a question about CoV. Someone wrote this:
>I read Saturday's and Sunday's digests Thursday afternoon, and
>I had my illumination on Thursday night.
What are Saturdays and Sundays digests? is there a summary
of threads archived somewhere? I mean if I go away for a fortnight
is there anyway I can get back up to speed without entering a
"spiraling recursive growth of postings to be read" process?

>> How this makes me think we are all in danger of commiting the
>>same fallacy as bible bashers.
>Note that is panrationalism that is being critiqued here, not
>pancritical rationalism.
I was making that mistake. Now it really is becoming
clearer. I see the distinction between pancritical rationalism and
Thanks for the post Dave.

Tony Hindle.
I looked up "infinite" in the dictionary, It said "see infinity".
(thats always the way, I can never get a straight answer from a dictionary)
So then I looked up "infinity", it said "see infinite".
....The Rev. C. Darwin.