Civility

[esldude]

Don't worry. Hardly any American south of the Canadian border has any idea who he is.

 

That is not true. I live far south of Canada and have heard Chomsky described many times. Anarchist-socialist-communist pinhead from somewhere up north who criticizes the US gov't in a way no good patriot would. Plus he is anti-capitalist which isn't surprising as he came from Russia. Or at least that's what I heard....several times......not usually in nice tones.

 

Then again, I actually have read some of his writings unlike most of those describing him in unflattering terms.

[Paul R]

Do you believe everything you read in the press?

 

 

Facts are our friends...

 

According to the Reporters Without Borders Press Freedom Index 2011/2012, US is ranked #47. #1 to #8 are European countries, as are 16 of the first 25 entries.

 

Happy to see other numbers/reports supporting your view...

[Paul R]

Oh Great Scotts... (Both of you guys I guess)...

 

You are always entitled to your own opinion, no matter how bone headed indisputably wrong it may be. And nobody but nobody has the right to tell you different.

 

Now if you act on your opinion that you ought to shoot me, that's your right. But expect a strong dispute on my part to your opinion, delivered with whatever actions are necessary to whatever location or locations necessary, to disabuse you of your silly ass opinion.

 

-Paul

 

 

 

FWIW, I agree. When and if we run across crazy-talk, I think we have an obligation to label it as such. You are not entitled to an opinion if that opinion is invalid or unsound -- in fact, we also have an obligation to change our opinions in the face of relevant evidence or logical contradiction. That's what logic is and what logic requires -- of everyone.

 

That said, odd choices made by marketeers doesn't entail a consequent lack of performance in the thing being (poorly) marketed, but only that the stated explanation for said performance may well be inaccurate.

 

Why marketeers say what they say is, I'm sure, very interesting. Personally, I don't care. So, pseudo-scientific techno-babble aside, the question remains whether or not said product actually performs to a high or higher level. Whether or not it can is another, unrelated, question.

[Paul R]

As soon as questions of will or decision or reason or choice of action arise, human science is at a loss.

Noam Chomsky

Read more at Noam Chomsky Quotes - BrainyQuote

 

Seems quite appropriate to me.

-Paul

 

That is not true. I live far south of Canada and have heard Chomsky described many times. Anarchist-socialist-communist pinhead from somewhere up north who criticizes the US gov't in a way no good patriot would. Plus he is anti-capitalist which isn't surprising as he came from Russia. Or at least that's what I heard....several times......not usually in nice tones.

 

Then again, I actually have read some of his writings unlike most of those describing him in unflattering terms.

[johnemcgregor]

"Skepticism has never founded empires, established principals, or changed the world's heart. The great doers in history have always been people of faith." -Edwin Hubbel Chapin

[Sik_Lescinovid]

"Skepticism has never founded empires, established principals, or changed the world's heart. The great doers in history have always been people of faith." -Edwin Hubbel Chapin

 

That is simply not true. Goes to show why this whole "famous quotes" business is rather superficial. Speaking of which, let's turn this into a famous yet superfluous quotes thread! Here's another nutty quote:

 

"After silence, that which comes nearest to expressing the inexpressible is music." - Aldous Huxley

 

It's BS because he's contradicting himself and thus nut saying anything worthwhile.

[wdw]

That is simply not true. Goes to show why this whole "famous quotes" business is rather superficial. Speaking of which, let's turn this into a famous yet superfluous quotes thread! Here's another nutty quote:

 

"After silence, that which comes nearest to expressing the inexpressible is music." - Aldous Huxley

 

It's BS because he's contradicting himself and thus nut saying anything worthwhile.

 

I disagree...if we substitute, say, "expressing the mystery" or "the Unknowable" the sentence stands...but no doubt it was the mescaline talking... ;-)

[chg]

Such opinionated generalizations are fantastic examples of a blatant 'Lack' of both civility and tolerance, and posted in such poor taste to be exemplified as a direct contradiction to your proposed viewpoint and participation of this thread.

 

After reading several of your contributions to this thread, I find you sir are actually stirring the pot and providing absolutely nothing towards developing an atmosphere of civility of which I believe was the intention of the thread in the first place.

 

The original thread was closed for reasons discussing the proposed performance of a particular piece of equipment. There seems to me little point in discussing those points further but instead find a way to be tolerant of different points of view.

 

Instead of "objectivists" and "subjectivists," may I suggest we adopt the more neutral terms "skeptics" and "believers", or maybe even "rationalists" and "irrationalists"?

 

You don't have a problem with this, but you have a problem with my reply, which aren't even my words.

 

Lessons in civility from member mayhem13, how ironic.

 

I find you sir are actually stirring the pot and providing absolutely nothing towards developing an atmosphere of civility...

 

Another irony.

 

Sorry to see that that particular quote from John Atkinson affected you so negatively, something must have rung true to have had such an impact.

[wgscott]

That is simply not true. Goes to show why this whole "famous quotes" business is rather superficial. ...

 

Famous perhaps in the church of the believers, but I had to look it up in Wikipedia:

 

Edwin Hubbell Chapin (December 29, 1814 – 1880) was an American preacher and editor of the Christian Leader

 

How odd.

 

Are we to equate those who call themselves subjectivists with Christianity? Maybe so. They seem to share some things in common, like assumed moral superiority, belief in the palpably absurd and in imaginary entities, and a huge persecution complex.

[chg]

Are we to equate those who call themselves subjectivists with Christianity? Maybe so. They seem to share some things in common, like assumed moral superiority, belief in the palpably absurd and in imaginary entities, and a huge persecution complex.

 

Only if we equate those who call themselves objectivists blind, deaf, and numb. They seem to share some things in common.

 

I don't disagree with the religious comments personally, but I'm sure you'll see some activity soon. Not an area I would have gone.

[wgscott]

I didn't produce the quote that appeals to some obscure Christian theologian.

[chg]

Which quote?

[wgscott]

This one:

 

"Skepticism has never founded empires, established principals, or changed the world's heart. The great doers in history have always been people of faith." -Edwin Hubbel Chapin

[johnemcgregor]

"Are we to equate those who call themselves subjectivists with Christianity? Maybe so. They seem to share some things in common, like assumed moral superiority, belief in the palpably absurd and in imaginary entities, and a huge persecution complex."

 

Interesting response in a thread titled civility.

[mayhem13]

The recent references to Religion present a civilized quality that this and many great nations were founded on.....

 

Tolerance.

[Priaptor]

"Are we to equate those who call themselves subjectivists with Christianity? Maybe so. They seem to share some things in common, like assumed moral superiority, belief in the palpably absurd and in imaginary entities, and a huge persecution complex."

 

Interesting response in a thread titled civility.

 

I am a Jew, but don't get where you are coming from. IMHO Christianity is indeed under attack in this country as is religion in general. It seems that the so called tolerant among us are only tolerant as long as we agree with their morals and principles.

[esldude]

removed due to ridiculous nature of this thread.

[Paul R]

"Skepticism has never founded empires, established principals, or changed the world's heart. The great doers in history have always been people of faith." -Edwin Hubbel Chapin [/Quote]

That is simply not true.

 

I knew someone would bring that Glen Beck critter into this.... (grin)

 

Hi Sik -

Actually, and more seriously, I cannot think of any empires that true "skeptics" have built. Visionary people with faith in thier ideas and beliefs practicing rational skepticism, yes - lots of examples.

 

What are you thinking of?

 

-Paul

[mav52]

The whole thread started off pretty good, but now, it nothing but "objectivists" and "subjectivists," "rationalists" and "irrationalists"? Same old, same old.

 

 

" I cannot think of any empires that true "skeptics" have built " maybe you should ask these people, a whole site full of them

Skeptic » About Us » A Brief Introduction

[Paul R]

The whole thread started off pretty good, but now, it nothing but "objectivists" and "subjectivists," "rationalists" and "irrationalists"? Same old, same old.

 

 

" I cannot think of any empires that true "skeptics" have built " maybe you should ask these people, a whole site full of them

Skeptic » About Us » A Brief Introduction

 

I am already on the membership rolls, and have been in CSI since 1976. (i.e. - The beginning.) Skepticism is not about being confrontative and annoying - it is about finding and recognizing the truth among all the distractions. It is certainly not about rejecting claims a priori, as happened with the thread that spawned this one.

 

And I still know of no empires built by skeptics. Do you?

 

-Paul

 

P.S. I love this quote from the introduction you referenced in your link -

 

I have made a ceaseless effort not to ridicule, not to bewail, not to scorn human actions, but to understand them.

—Baruch Spinoza

 

 

[/Quote]

[Audio_ELF]

Do you believe everything you read in the press?

Certainly not what's on Fox News :-)

[Audio_ELF]

"Skepticism has never founded empires, established principals, or changed the world's heart. The great doers in history have always been people of faith." -Edwin Hubbel Chapin

Since when have Empire Builders been working to the greater good though?

 

I don't want to have Godwin's Law quoted to me so I won't provide the extreme example ... but most Empires are built out of a greed for power NOT any philanthropic motive. And as for "changed the world's heart"... I wonder what that really means - it is suggested that everyone should think and feel the same??

 

The recent references to Religion present a civilized quality that this and many great nations were founded on.....

 

Tolerance.

At times there is very little tolerance of the differences in society. Both on a national level and in closer communities. Both of our nations have both dark stains and more recently smaller skirmishes in our past which suggest we are not as tolerant of differences as we would like to think.

 

Eloise

[Julf]

Do you believe everything you read in the press?

 

No. But I still believe Reporters Without Borders more than I do some "Paul.Raulerson" character on the internet. As I said, Happy to see other numbers/reports supporting your view...

[chg]

Originally Posted by Priaptor

 

Your assumption that "subjectivity" assumes irrationality is irrational.

 

Well, per definition and most dictionaries...

 

As an example, let's take Dictionary.com:

 

"ir·ra·tion·al·i·ty [ih-rash-uh-nal-i-tee] noun, plural ir·ra·tion·al·i·ties for 2.

1. the quality or condition of being irrational.

2. an irrational, illogical, or absurd action, thought, etc."

 

Of course you don't have to agree with the dictionary...

 

I'd like to see you guys (wgscott & Julf) run this proposal by your significant other first, and see if they agree with you. Oh please do that, and film it.

 

If subjectivity = irrationality (as you propose) and choosing a spouse = a subjective decision, then your choice of spouse was an "irrational", or "absurd action". Correct?

[Priaptor]

I'd like to see you guys (wgscott & Julf) run this proposal by your significant other first, and see if they agree with you. Oh please do that, and film it.

 

If subjectivity = irrationality (as you propose) and choosing a spouse = a subjective decision, then your choice of spouse was an "irrational", or "absurd action". Correct?

 

YES

 

I admit defeat. There is no room for subjectivity as per your excellent example.