Re: virus: Re:Strange attractors and meta-religions (was God and Level-3)

D. H. Rosdeitcher (
08 Apr 97 21:10:23 EDT

David McF. wrote:

I wrote:
>> When I first came to CoV about 10 weeks ago, I thought it was just a
>> discussion group, knowing nothing about the structure. It seemed like
>> was just attacking me, and not offering their ideas. I think that the
>> of the forum should be made clear from the outset.

David McF. wrote:
>Do you think you can rewrite history without anyone noticing? Maybe you weren't
>aware that there is an archive of every message posted to this list available
>to anyone that cares to look on the web. Let's let the facts speak for
>David R. subscribed to the virus mailing list on Jan. 29.

David McF.-- Read more carefully. I said that at CoV, people used a structure
that someone on the outside would not be familiar with. But, they didn't
disclose to newcomers too much about that structure (ie.conjecture/refutation),
even pretending that they were engaging in a mystical process of
"level-jumping". It's like me walking into a martial arts class of people doing
a wierd martial art and the experienced people not explaining the fundamental
principles behind the martial art.
Also, if you look at my posts, the statements I made were all falsifiable,
which, according to PCR, is the best I can do. Here are my quotes:

Jan. 29 [C of V: Another Religion]
"It seems to me that the Church of Virus is promoting a mystical notion by
denying free will and claiming that the 'meme' is a higher power that controls
individuals and societies. "

Message #4:
Feb. 3 [Anti-Virus Protection]
"For instance, when I showed why the ideology promoted by the Church
of Virus is bogus, some people chose to ignore me. There's nothing I can do
about that. However, just as a parasite is dependent on its host, the dishonest
members of CoV are dependent on honest members being duped and confused by such
dopey ideologies. For most of these dishonest members, the big payoff is a
drug-like high of manipulating others. However, for the few most cleverly
dishonest members, the big payoff is financial-their *livelihood* depends on
manipulating others."

message #8:
Feb. 4 [The War is On!!!]
"The reason I wrote this was because I felt embarrassed, that when I made the
attack, I was not correct about certain specifics-I never saw a situation
exactly like this one where people have a hidden code of behavior that I was
unfamiliar with. However, the essence of what I was saying, about the dishonesty
and the neocheating, was correct. Now I am familiar and now I understand the
"Church of Virus" concept better than whoever the "Guru" is. "

message #9:
Feb. 5 [Destroying CoV]
"The Church of Virus is an evil hoax that can be quickly destroyed as soon as
it's understood. "

David McF. wrote:
>So in a single week, you completely understood the CoV and set out
>to destroy it. Who was attacking whom?

I didn't say there that I completely understood CoV, but I did imply that I
would destroy it. I still stand by that claim. This is because PCR and CoV, like
Rand's version of Objectivism, may have their limitations.
For instance, the concept of "contextual certainty" found in the writings of
Rand actually does have a problem, as Lee mentioned. There is no distinction
betweeen 'contextual certainty' based on a personal process of inductive
reasoning and 'contextual certainty' based on testing and criticizing from
others. The concept of 'contextual certainty' is limited--it is good for helping
people trust their own judgement, but not good enough for learning about
PCR as practiced at CoV has limitations too, as exemplified by the way
people try to get away with distorting context.
Something better than PCR may come along, and if I find it, then I will
destroy the CoV, if I feel like it. --David Rosdeitcher