Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id KAA14439 (8.6.9/5.3[ref email@example.com] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from firstname.lastname@example.org); Sat, 22 Sep 2001 10:40:28 +0100 Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2001 09:59:28 +0100 To: email@example.com Subject: Re: Dawkins was right all along Message-ID: <20010922095928.B939@ii01.org> References: <F27729cM3oryKFRJrzd000021cc@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.15i In-Reply-To: <F27729cM3oryKFRJrzd000021cc@hotmail.com>; from firstname.lastname@example.org on Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 02:55:26PM -0400 From: Robin Faichney <email@example.com> Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: email@example.com
On Fri, Sep 21, 2001 at 02:55:26PM -0400, Scott Chase wrote:
> I thought objectivity
> entailed not taking a normative stance on what you study or at least
> approaching what you study in a more balanced manner.
Of course! But you don't need to study what you already know is all
It's very like the common response to terrorism: you don't study bad
things, you eliminate them!
> I've seen some
> anti-religious sentiment focusing on the negatives.
Isn't that what it's supposed to do? :-)
> BTW, I'm trying to figure out what distorting sentiments of religion are
> creeping in to bias my *agnostic* views.
Sure you're not taking the concept of balance to extremes??
-- "The distinction between mind and matter is in the mind, not in matter." Robin Faichney -- inside information -- http://www.ii01.org/
=============================================================== This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing) see: http://www.cpm.mmu.ac.uk/jom-emit
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Sep 22 2001 - 10:45:26 BST