Re: virus: Re: shaman

Wade T. Smith (
Sat, 16 Aug 1997 18:04:13 -0400

>1) Con men don't inform their "marks"
>2) Shaman are like con men
>3) Therefore Shaman don't inform their "clients"
>4) Both con men and Shamans don't inform their "marks/clients"
>5) Therefore #2

Well, I make no such syllogism.

I only go as far as saying-

1) Both con men and shamans leave their clients in the dark.
2) Are shaman perhaps con men?

I grant you that the evidence for shamans leaving their clients in the dark
is only that of there being no gathered body of knowledge freely available
to the general public. Which is of course not true for practically anything
else... except confidence games. Actually, I take that back- there is
probably much more available knowledge about confidence games than there is
about shamanism, at least the practice of it....

>Oh great and noble Jargon-Spouting Professionnal! Although I am not
>worthy even to lick the blood of freshmen off the underside of your mighty
>boots, I beg of you, show me where to find this oft touted but as yet
>unseen information you speak of!!!

Uh, the library? The journals of the professions? Internationally published
magazines? PBS? Time-Life books? What are you talking about?

And, I am not a jargon-spouting professional.

And I don't want to get lost in this. I have no need for shamans. I don't
think anyone else does either, but that is my bias. I'll live with it.

Wade T. Smith | "Ideal conversation must be an exchange | of thought, and not, as many of those | who worry most about their shortcomings | believe, an eloquent exhibition of
| wit or oratory." - Emily Post
************** ****************