From: Kalkor (kalkor@kalkor.com)
Date: Tue Jan 15 2002 - 20:08:06 MST
[Kirk]
How abaout that! A newbie sees it too.
The Yash Based Mermaid defense initiative - "No, that's not what he meant to
not say!"
Way to go Kalkor!!!
[/Kirk]
[Kalkor] I'm starting to, Kirk... see below ;-}
[Mermaid 1] These are not 'dubious' or obscure claims made by Yash.
[Hermit 2] They are. As you very well know, seeing as you had to go through
an entire sequence of refutations to get to the one claim I could not
instantly refute from personal knowledge - but on the face of it, stinks as
badly as the rest. In addition, the claim is just that. An assertion that
something exists. It was Yash's - and now your assertion too it seems - you
fucking prove it. A verse reference will be sufficient. Sheesh, is this kind
of a weird hybrid of his stupidity and your obnoxiousness?
[Kalkor] Sounds about right. "I say this is true" "Prove that what you say
is true" "No YOU prove that what I say is true"
[Mermaid]No. That was not the point. Yash makes a claim. Hermit wants proof.
Unless Yash provides the proof or unless Hermit proves Yash wrong, it is
neither false nor true. I dont think anyone is asking Hermit to prove Yash's
claim. The key is in the direct access to the said source. I provided the
key. The book is available. Until it has been read and understood, neither
Yash's claim nor Hermit's bias are valid. btw, I made no claim. Hermit lies
when he says that, "It was Yash's - and now your assertion too it seems -
you fucking prove it."
[Mermaid]I have been trying for sometime now to get people to read or at
least appreciate the advantages of first hand knowledge. I keep dropping
hints in the form of book titles, urls and ways and means to search for
information themselves. I am wondering what it will take for people to start
reading for themselves here instead of aping the loudest in this group.
Unfortunately, Hermit has won. He has succeded in making some of the
denizens of CoV lazy. Too lazy to read. Too lazy to think. Too lazy to do
their own research. Too lazy to come to their own conclusions. This place
has become stagnant and stale to the point where asking someone to refer to
the original text amounts to making some kind of assertion. Shame!
[Hermit]
"At the end of the day, those listening to this non-discussion will decide
on the truth of the proposition. As most of them will not perform the
research, they will probably decide based on whether my opinion or yours is
better justified and thus carries more weight." - Hermit, CoV.
[Kalkor] That statement is completely free from delusions (including the
self- variety). In addition, it makes a very good point about why we should
NOT need to perform the research ourselves. There is an accepted
procedure/ruleset known as the Scientific Method that removes the necessity
for us to reinvent the wheel. In my ideal universe, I could learn everything
first hand through experiment and observation. However, that is not the
reality we inhabit. We MUST rely on others to do some of the research and
experimentation, otherwise what's the point of even having written language?
How can we do this? By applying logical, critical methods to how/when/why we
accept information as "fact". The same point is made more eloquently below,
but not with the same succinct impact ;-}
[Hermit] I am as free of belief - through careful conscious effort - as I
think a person can be. I always look at the evidence and the speaker before
judging. Not through the spectacles of faith, but using what I already know
about the world to determine what is probable and what is not, who is likely
to report accurately and who is not. Then I decide what the evidence
suggests and assign it some truth value. And I always judge - even when the
judgment is "insufficient evidence". If something seems to be supported -
even if unlikely (an under water living bird) - I tend to accept it
provisionally into my reality model if from a reliable source (from a
biologist). If something does not appear supported (conflicts with my
reality model, no available evidence), it is likely to score very low and
will not alter my reality model although I might still accept it
provisionally (an aqua-keet) into a "virtual" reality model, if I consider
the source acceptable (e.g. Magic Jim) or trustworthy (e.g. Most - but not
all of my fellow Virians). If I am provided something by an untrustworthy
source that is well supported, I will only accept it into my reality model
if the evidence is very strong. Something which does not have strong
evidence and does not have appropriate support is unlikely to be
incorporated into my reality model at all. Even provisionally. Is this
belief? Not a chance. It is judgment.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 25 2002 - 13:28:39 MDT