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

Re: freedom evolves

Expand Messages
  • louise
    ... tc, what is the meaning of this adjective with which you would qualify my name?? i am trying to have a conversation with you, at best, defending my own
    Message 1 of 9 , Apr 30, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      > Preposterous Louise
      >
      > You are not my mother, teacher, confessor, nor peer. I am hardly in
      > need of your correction. Please stop attempting it.
      >
      > tc

      tc,

      what is the meaning of this adjective with which you would qualify
      my name??

      i am trying to have a conversation with you, at best, defending my
      own honour sometimes, offering explanations, asking questions which
      you never answer. what the heck gives you the idea i might be your
      mother, teacher or confessor?? i am not trying to correct you. i
      am asking you to comply with the list rules so as to make it easier
      for me to comply with them. and for their own sake. that seems
      reasonable. if i am not your peer, how do you see me?? if as an
      inferior, then you, sir, are the fascist.

      louise
    • Bob Keyes
      Louise, Tinkering with Ideas is not BAD. It is what Humans should be doing.They should be striving to improve them like Science did with the Scientific Method
      Message 2 of 9 , Apr 30, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        Louise, Tinkering with Ideas is not BAD. It is what Humans should be
        doing.They should be striving to improve
        them like Science did with the Scientific Method for instance. It is in our
        Interest to Tinker. If Nolan is Religious he is a
        Non Rational Human. Nothing wrong with that, were are made mostly irrational
        by Nature. I don't see it is bad(I actually do but what I mean is there is
        nothing much we can do about it at the moment) , just a Random
        thing that happened. Nolan's counter Arguments ( and I am only speaking for
        me here) are Meaningless. It just Means
        I don't accept any of his(or that type) of assumptions or methodologies as
        valid.
        Just a thought at the moment.
        Bob...Comments ?
        -----Original Message-----
        From: existlist@yahoogroups.com [mailto:existlist@yahoogroups.com]On
        Behalf Of louise
        Sent: Saturday, April 30, 2005 12:13 PM
        To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: [existlist] Re: freedom evolves


        Siobhan,

        [One might infer] you are being a mite patronising. I guess
        Einstein didn't advocate nuclear bomb technology. Tinkering with
        ideas is dangerous. Mature religious people - and Nolan is
        unusually mature for his age - can be one group that exercise a wise
        restraint in debate, or offer some stimulating counter-argument.

        Louise

        --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Siobhan" <bravegnoobee@y...>
        wrote:
        > Nolan,
        >
        > You're being a bit hysterical. I don't advocate eugenics. Some of
        the
        > scientific arguments for free will and freedom are based on
        culture and
        > environment, not specific DNA, although gene 'clusters' may be
        > involved. In an earlier post of Dennett's concept, I agreed that
        if one
        > is aware of or perceives that s(he) has free will they're more
        likely
        > to exercise it. Not everyone perceives the same way. It's not a
        matter
        > of superiority: it's a matter of making choices within your
        ability to
        > make choices. Our ability to make choices depends on many factors;
        but
        > ultimately it's how we elate to nothingness that determines our
        > choices. That's all. We've only begun to understand our our brains
        > work, and I certainly don't advocate obliterating or tinkering
        with
        > brain material - just ideas.
        >
        > Siobhan





        Please support the Existential Primer... dedicated to explaining nothing!

        Home Page: http://www.tameri.com/csw/exist



        ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
        --
        Yahoo! Groups Links

        a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
        http://groups.yahoo.com/group/existlist/

        b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        existlist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

        c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • nolanhatley
        Siobhan, Fair enough. However, why do you persist in your posts to hypothesize and tintillate with the idea of one who has a religous understanding of the
        Message 3 of 9 , May 2, 2005
        • 0 Attachment
          Siobhan,

          Fair enough. However, why do you persist in your posts to
          hypothesize and tintillate with the idea of one who has a religous
          understanding of the universe or a faith is of intellectual
          inferiority? I agree with you wholeheartedly with any frustration
          of mindless unchallenged religous views that dictate a person to
          ignore other's perspectives. As far as hysteria's concerned, I
          don't know about that. Prejudice makes very angry: religous,
          ethnic, racial, etc. I have been guilty before myself, but I hope
          that my faith is purifying me of base intellectual assumptions.
          Harm for prejudice, but nothing else.

          Grace and Peace,

          Nolan



          --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "Siobhan" <bravegnoobee@y...>
          wrote:
          > Nolan,
          >
          > You're being a bit hysterical. I don't advocate eugenics. Some of
          the
          > scientific arguments for free will and freedom are based on
          culture and
          > environment, not specific DNA, although gene 'clusters' may be
          > involved. In an earlier post of Dennett's concept, I agreed that
          if one
          > is aware of or perceives that s(he) has free will they're more
          likely
          > to exercise it. Not everyone perceives the same way. It's not a
          matter
          > of superiority: it's a matter of making choices within your
          ability to
          > make choices. Our ability to make choices depends on many factors;
          but
          > ultimately it's how we elate to nothingness that determines our
          > choices. That's all. We've only begun to understand our our brains
          > work, and I certainly don't advocate obliterating or tinkering
          with
          > brain material - just ideas.
          >
          > Siobhan
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.