From: Michelle (michelle@barrymenasherealtors.com)
Date: Mon Sep 23 2002 - 15:39:31 MDT
[Joe] I know things that many others do not, just as many others know things
that I do not; it benefits us all for each of us to both share our
respective knowledge with others, and desire to receive knowledge from
others, for such sharing raises the average general level of knowledge.
[Michelle] If you assume that there is such a thing as Truth that needs to
be disseminated, then you assume that some have knowledge of it and some
don't. What is the best method for determining who has it and who doesn't?
How can we apply standards of truth and falsehood and remain humble to the
prospect that someone else might have a better answer? It seems that the
analysis of the underlying memes is the most indicative of whether a
position is formed from motivation to Truth or motivation to meme
propagation - the fundamental distinction being openness to being proved
wrong, correct? Anyone motivated by Truth is open to being proven wrong,
and anyone motivated by being _right_ is certainly not open to being proven
_wrong_.
I always run into this when trying to have discussions about anything... I
am kept from assertion by the need to be unassertive to serve the greater
goal of finding Truth... what happens then?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 25 2002 - 13:28:59 MDT