Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Off Topic: please reply in private

Expand Messages
  • bob@xxxx.xxx.xxx
    Yay, chance to turn this creaking boat into LOTE waters! ... I would feel better about your argument if you used Liberal instead of liberal, the latter
    Message 1 of 51 , Oct 1, 1999
    • 0 Attachment
      Yay, chance to turn this creaking boat into LOTE waters!

      > From: "Frank Kane" <frankkane@...>
      > I am really having to hold back here. In my lifetime I have watched
      > left-wing Humanists persecute the science of SocioBiology virtually out of
      > existance, do everything possible to sabotage research into Genetics, and
      > seriously hamper the exploration of space. If it were not for interference
      > by "liberal" Humanists, we would have by now (at least) one large space
      > station, a functioning colony on the Moon, and a Mars mission well on it's
      > way. Let's not even get into the Luddite hijinks of a certain Humanist sect
      > known as the "Animal Rights Movement"; I don't even begin to have the time
      > to deal with them.... My essential point however, which you clearly
      > didn't get, is that Humanism is, repeat emphasize IS, IS, IS a religion ,
      > i.e. a belief system predicated on metaphysical concepts, and it has among
      > other things, at least it's full share of religious stupidity.
      > I don't care if that's a new idea for you. Your entire frame-of-reference
      > is obviously 100% Eurocentric; if you'd ever seriously encountered Zen or
      > Taoism or Tibetan Buddhism, you'd have to completely rethink your definition
      > of what's religious and what's secular.

      I would feel better about your argument if you used "Liberal" instead of
      "liberal," the latter being an outlook to which most modern "Conservatives"
      would subscribe.

      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: Yungrpliny@... <Yungrpliny@...>
      > To: LOTE-L@onelist.com <LOTE-L@onelist.com>
      > Date: Thursday, September 30, 1999 12:13 PM
      > Subject: Re: [LOTE-L] Off Topic: please reply in private
      > >From: Yungrpliny@...
      > >
      > >In a message dated 09/30/1999 12:58:59 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
      > >frankkane@... writes:
      > >
      > ><< If you don't buy totally
      > > metaphysical concepts like "Justice" and "Humanity" as your basic
      > premises,
      > > then the whole thing falls apart completely. >>
      > >Guess I'm just an optimist then, I've always rather liked those two
      > concepts.
      > >And, in actuality, my point was less that humanism fostered technological
      > >advance (though you and I disagree there, I think freedom of ideas is very
      > >powerful as an aide in original thought), and more that religion is often
      > >somewhat less tolerant of innovation. ;-)

      Keep in mind that I'm neither a philosopher nor a historian.

      Nevertheless, one needs to keep in mind the impact of the Enlightenment of
      the 18th C in Europe. As I dimly understand it, the idea was that you could
      have a society in which people were allowed to think what they liked, and
      that society would not immediately combust into mob rule. The roots were
      in the Reformation.

      LOTE content? If one allows a multiplicity of religions in a campaign, and
      can actually pull this off after the inevitable DFs and whatnot, then the
      reward ought to be faster tech progress, a lower chance for DF, and perhaps
      some other perqs. I tried this in LOTE01 but nothing positive ever came of it.

      Getting the Renaissance is the easy part. Taking the next step is where
      things get really messy. Breaking the link between political power and
      religious organization should in LOTE be tough yet rewarding in tech terms.
      OTOH a king in LOTE does not really get much from being devout. If he has
      a DF, the local archbishop (probably his uncle ...) is not there to claim
      that the other side are pretenders and ungodly.

      As for research, I've heard that extreme conservatives have also had a large
      hand in holding back research with fetal cells. This may or may not be a
      morally good thing, but it is a fact. As for sociobiology, it is regretable,
      especially given recent work. But fields where one tries to relate genetics
      to behavior has had a spotty history of somewhat less than objective research.
      Things are improving, but one ought to be wary when dealing with social
      studies. IMHO.

      My take on the space program is that, well, once we got to the Moon, we had
      won. In the popular mindset, why push it to the next level? Been there,
      done that. At the time, IIRC, the main idea was to show up the Soviets, who
      were at the start displaying an annoying propensity for besting the US, or
      at least keeping pace. I of course am talking about public perceptions
      here. Lots of non-Liberals thought (and think) space exploration is a waste
      of money and takes up large chunks of the budget.

      But I digress. :^)

      C.S. Cornuelle
      School of Mathematics/MCIM
      206 Church St. SE
      University of Minnesota
      Minneapolis, MN 55455
      (612) 626-8930, 624-9069
      Ferventer Vestite
    • VICTORYHILL@xxxxx.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
      Lets not forget the monks and thier contributions, Namley Brandy and Chamainge Lorin From: Jeff ... dominated ... have ... Western
      Message 51 of 51 , Oct 2, 1999
      • 0 Attachment
        Lets not forget the monks and thier contributions, Namley Brandy and


        From: Jeff <rebel@...>

        At 09:49 AM 9/30/99 EDT, you wrote:
        >From: SalterDJ@...
        >In a message dated 9/30/99 2:01:03 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
        >Yungrpliny@... writes:
        >> From: Yungrpliny@...
        >> Why don't we start a special LOTE game with creationists on one side and
        >> evolutionists on the other. Both sides will start with the technology and
        >> social structures that their "side" historically championed. So, let's
        >> the creationists will start with an all white, hierarchical male
        >> social structure in which Women and minorities are relegated to second
        >> status, medicine exists at the medieval level, and discussing physics and
        >> astronomy that does not correspond to biblical canons (as interpreted by
        >> hierarchy) is banned. The evolutionists would have a rather chaotic,
        >> egalitarian, society based on suffrage and democracy, superior knowledge
        >> the sciences (specifically physics and astronomy), and literature not
        >> limited
        >> to any one viewpoint (my favorite). I'm not sure who'd win but I'm pretty
        >> sure most of the players would actually prefer to live in the evolving
        >> world...Now I know the kind and decent thought here is that both concepts
        >> could be taught in school at the same time, but the blindly religious
        >> had their way throughout most of history, so I'm for a little righteous
        >> payback... let's burn THEIR books, eh? ;-)
        >> (If you can't take deep breaths after you read this, re-read it a couple
        >> more times, try breathing again, then reply...)
        >Mindless revisionist history is a wonderful thing to behold. You're
        >beautiful man!

        Western Civilization was saved by Christians. I suggest reading "how the
        Irish saved Civilization" i forget the authors name. The gist of it is that
        it was the church that preserved education and higher learning in the years
        after the fall of Rome. Dave is right, modern revisionist (usually with an
        axe to grind) ignore this and see the Church only as the corrupt entity it
        became centuries later. Ignoring the good works and benefits it gave to
        western culture.


        Lords of the Earth On-Line: http://www.throneworld.com/lords/
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.