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

47939Re: [existlist] Re: The functions of thinking

Expand Messages
  • eupraxis@aol.com
    Apr 29, 2009
      L,

      I will not respond to that kind of statement from you.

      Wil


      -----Original Message-----
      From: louise <hecubatoher@...>
      To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 11:22 am
      Subject: [existlist] Re: The functions of thinking



      Wil,



      That is pretentious left-wing gobbledegook, and you did not answer the
      question.



      Louise



      --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eupraxis@... wrote:

      >

      > L,

      >

      > In other words, race only makes sense on the level of ideology and

      > xenologism.

      >

      > Wil

      >

      >

      > -----Original Message-----

      > From: louise <hecubatoher@...>

      > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com

      > Sent: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 11:03 am

      > Subject: [existlist] Re: The functions of thinking

      >

      > What exactly does have meaning, on the level of the genome??

      >

      > Louise

      >

      > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eupraxis@ wrote:

      >

      > >

      >

      > > Nice pandering. On the level of the genome, the concept of race has

      > no

      >

      > > meaning.

      >

      > >

      >

      > > Wil

      >

      > >

      >

      > >

      >

      > > -----Original Message-----

      >

      > > From: devogney <tsmith17_midsouth1@>

      >

      > > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com

      >

      > > Sent: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 12:09 pm

      >

      > > Subject: [existlist] Re: The functions of thinking

      >

      > >

      >

      > >

      >

      > > -Louise,

      >

      > >

      >

      > > I very much agree with your statement Political suppression is

      > ignored

      >

      > > and denied, so that what claims to be science may only be a highly

      >

      > > selective application of focussed intelligence.

      >

      > >

      >

      > >

      >

      > > The results of scientific studies to a large extent will be the

      > results

      >

      > > that the organization funding the study desires.In the US over the

      > last

      >

      > > 35 years or so, a good example is studies on pot smoking funded by

      > the

      >

      > > Drug Enforcement Administration.Any study funded by the DEA that

      > found

      >

      > > anything good about pot would never be published, and certainly the

      >

      > > scientist would have lost a source of future funding. Likewise, any

      >

      > > studies comparing different races or the 2 sexes, if the results
      come

      >

      > > out wrong will subject the scientist to charges of racism or

      >

      > > sexism.Certainly political and economic factors play a large role in

      >

      > > what studies are done, what criteria are compared, and the

      > conclusions

      >

      > > reached.

      >

      > >

      >

      > > Tom

      >

      > >

      >

      > >

      >

      > >

      >

      > > -- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "louise" <hecubatoher@> wrote:

      >

      > >

      >

      > > >

      >

      > >

      >

      > > > Still attempting to get a purchase on the basics. How to

      >

      > > discriminate different realms of concern. As an example, a recent

      >

      > > reference, the question arising, what is an Anglo-Saxon? This is
      not

      > a

      >

      > > biological category. However, the further question arises, as to
      the

      >

      > > superstitious and magical nature of science, to which I have
      referred

      >

      > > also. Political suppression is ignored and denied, so that what

      > claims

      >

      > > to be science may only be a highly selective application of focussed

      >

      > > intelligence. To become a 'scientist', one must pass certain tests

      > of

      >

      > > social acceptability, which are cultural or quasi-religious, and
      may

      > be

      >

      > > themselves highly unscientific. What responsibilities are involved

      > in

      >

      > > philosophising? What is the relevance, if any, of courtesy? May
      one

      >

      > > only be a contemporary existentialist if developing a certain

      > toughness

      >

      > > or dexterity, or does the acquisition of such skill vitiate the

      > quality

      >

      > > of thought itself?

      >

      > >

      >

      > > >

      >

      > >

      >

      > > > Louise

      >

      > >

      >

      > > >

      >

      > >

      >
    • Show all 26 messages in this topic