Re: virus: MS Flip Software Price

Sodom (
Thu, 09 Oct 1997 12:40:35 -0400

Nathaniel Hall wrote:

> Tim Rhodes wrote:
> > On Mon, 6 Oct 1997, Nathaniel Hall wrote:
> >
> > > > Logic may help you achieve a goal, but it's no
> > > > good for setting goals, except for those that
> > > > are merely a means to some greater end,
> > > > and therefore not really goals at all.
> > >
> > > Not at all! Logic teaches you which goals are possible, and allows
> one
> > > to pick those which one has the greatest chance of achieving. One
> must
> > > know ones natural skills and what one can do with it LOGICALLY in
> order
> > > to set a goal!
> >
> > This is a good example of not the failing of logic, but the failings
> of
> > those who employ it. Often /attempting/ to reach a goal that logic
> tells
> > you is impossible will yield more fruit than simply reaching a the
> > simpler goal that is logically possible. The rationalist has been
> robbed,
> > in these situations, by his own logic.
> Not necessarily. I may persue a goal not knowing how far in advance I
> can
> take it. However if I know , logically , that the jouney itself is
> worthwhile
> even if I don't complete the trip it is still reasonable, that is
> logical, to
> persue it. These discourses right here are a good example of that. I
> don't
> know what is going to be said by the rest of the people on this list,
> but I do
> know from past experiance that it has proven to be worthwhile. A
> reasonable,
> logical, conclusion, and I have been robbed of nothing.
> > This is why people willing to
> > fail at great tasks are often more successful than their peers who
> always
> > succeed at the mundane.
> >
> Logical action must allow for some uncertainty in life. To deny that
> one does
> not know some things would be illogical. Failure is not all bad if one
> learns
> from one's mistakes. You've set up a straw man here in order to knock
> him down
> but a logical person could persue the course you've mentioned for the
> reasons
> I've listed.
> > Your logic /should/ tell you that overriding logic in some cases is
> the
> > best answer. Does it though?
> It's logical to be Ilogical? Come on now! I know you can't really
> believe
> that! Your trying to bait me! Rather have a strong enemy than a weak
> ally
> right?
> The Nateman.

It seems this line of discussion is senseless. Humans are not Vulcans.
We have to use logic and emotion together to select the most joyfull
course of action. You cannot make a logical choice for an emotional
response - in most cases. It seems to me that a proper balance is
necessary. If you want something (want is an emotion) you can choose a
logical course of action to achiev it most rapidly. But I dare you to
try "get some" from your mate in a logical only way. You can be logical
about the type of flower you buy, but desiring her affection is the
first choice and it is emotional/biological to start with.