RE: virus: Is learning valuable?
Wright, James  7929 (Jwright@phelpsd.com)
Mon, 07 Apr 97 10:23:00 EDT
Tad wrote:
>>There is a set of beliefs which stimulates independent learning.  The
>>intellectual elite -- who knows the set -- is divided into two groups:   
(1)
>>those who want to make the set of beliefs public (causing more people   
to
>>loose interest in "hunting" and other hard work needed for the survival   
of
>>the group), (2) those who want to keep the set secret.  Of course the   
first
>>group is spreading the set of beliefs, so what does the second group   
do?
>>Ridicules this particular set of beliefs.  This way more people can be   
kept
>>in the dark and serve as mental slaves to the society.  Who is doing a
>>better job for the society?
>>This is very interesting.  Of which group would you consider yourself a
>member?  Which would you assign other people on this to?[R K]
>>The first.  I believe everyone has a right to decide what to do with
>>knowledge.  Knowledge should not be hidden from anyone, as there is   
enough
>>for everybody.  Even such dangerous memes as 3 axioms (and even...   
4P's).<<
I do not consider the 3 axioms as dangerous, or even incorrrect; only   
...limited.
>>Trying to contradict or ridicule the three axioms (which I believe are   
the
>>most useful and stimulating for independent learning) seems to put a   
person
>>in the second group.<<
Having created a questionable dichotomy ("intellectual elite" versus "the   
rest of the world"), a second questionable dichotomy is postulated   
("publicizers" versus "secretizers"). These secretizers are colluding to   
create/maintain mental slaves to further their own political power and   
privilege.
Tad, Poland may have had such a structure. It may still have it. I do not   
understand that such a structure exists globally with any success, or   
Serbia would not be rioting now.
I do find your use of the word "believe" to be illuminating. I find your   
suggestion that those who question the three axioms to be mental slaves   
vaguely disturbing; it smacks of elitism on your part, or as David R. put   
it earlier, "Objectivism is an elitist philosophy". You are welcome to   
form any theory you like, and to consider me a mental slave if you wish;   
but I do not consider being a slave to Objectivism any better than being   
a slave to any other thought pattern.
>It is of course hard to know if they are trying to reverse axioms for   
the purpose of >deceiving others (and they secretly believe axioms) or if   
in fact their minds are not >capable of accepting the axioms.<
Another false dichotomy! What of those who find the arbitrary decree of   
three axioms unnecessary, and the actual three axioms chosen incomplete   
and insufficient? Is your mind not capable of accepting anything besides   
the three axioms as valid?
> I find interesting to study the motives.<
I don't; I quit looking for malicious conspiracies to dominate the   
planet. Those trying to do it openly are usually quite trouble enough!
james