Re: Objects and Relations

Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca> wrote:

>paul c wrote:

[snip]

>> Nobody asked me, but I think everybody should agree to stop this thread
>> as it gets into matters which humans are obviously incapable of. (Being
>> as religious as they seem to be, it amazes me how some posters can
>> persist in such arrogance, and me being rather atheistic, I think I
>> qualify as objective in this case.)
>
>As a devout lifelong atheist, I feel I have to step up and defend my
>irrationality here. Atheism is at least as irrational as any other
>religion or superstition. Some argue it is the least rational of
>religions because it doesn't offer the emotional crutch of promised
>salvation, ritual or social interaction.

     When I walk, I do not need crutches. I do not consider my walking without crutches to be the least rational way of walking. Draw the obvious conclusion about god.

>True objectivity demands agnosticism in the absense of empirical evidence.

     Occam's Razor: you want me to take a notion of yours seriously? Show some proof. Other than that, I can not be bothered.

    For example, I am not a unicorn-agnostic, a fairy-agnostic, or a vampire-agnostic.

[snip]

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

Computerese Irregular Verb Conjugation:

     I have preferences.
     You have biases.
     He/She has prejudices.