[533] in Discussion of MIT-community interests
Re: Racism and what-not
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Wally)
Fri May 4 11:21:33 2001
Date: Fri, 4 May 2001 11:24:29 -0400 (EDT)
From: Wally <wally@sub-zero.mit.edu>
To: Michael E Rolish <merolish@MIT.EDU>
cc: liane@MIT.EDU, mit-talk@MIT.EDU
In-Reply-To: <200105032222.SAA12279@burton-conner-1.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0105041114021.15206-100000@sub-zero.mit.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
> Catholicism, like other religions, is a body of dogma to be accepted
> on faith.
Well, 'faith' is what you think it is. For 'true-believers', the Bible is
empirical historical evidence. If you look at the world and arrive at the
conclusion that only a higher power could have been responsible for it,
then there are a few perfectly good, reasonably internally consistent
worldviews for you, in a number of flavors: poly-, mono-, and pantheistic;
with discretized responsibilities and punishments (largely), or in a more
continuous spectrum of being (e.g. the more universal view of all life as
manifestations of a life force, continually being 'reallocated', as in
Hinduism).
To say that you arrived at Objectivism empirically, rationally, and
without 'coercion' from elders, isn't strictly true; like as not, you read
the work of a single writer, liked what you read, saw correspondences to
your own beliefs, read 'supporting' texts, immersed yourself in the
culture, and the rhetorical and logical pieces fell into place for you.
It's like that for many Christians, except laissez-faire capitalism in its
pure form is a myth, the 'ideal man' is a myth, whereas many Christians
believe that the nature of the world is *living proof* that God exists and
can kick our collective ass.
> Let me put it another way: What is the likelihood someone who had never
> heard of Christianity (or any religion, for that matter) be able to come
> up with it? Attack Objectivism all you like - it is the only philosophy
> I've encountered that is not a useless mind game or a set of arbitrary
> assertions - it treats the subject as a science.
You don't read much *other* philosophy, do you?
> Oooh, philosophical question. I don't think I'm qualified to really
> discuss this in detail, but I will acknowledge the importance of
> genetic makeup and environmental circumstances. Ultimately, though,
> we have reason, intelligence, and free will; we can always think for
> ourselves and analyze our experiences. In this way we're not
> "determined" by our environment.
You don't read much daily news, do you?
Maybe the dream of liberalism is everyone needs a boost to live their own
way (or rather, the liberals' way). :)
W.
