[MD] " rule of thumb."

Fri Feb 9 08:53:52 PST 2007

 case,
"We use rules of thumb."
Is an english term for the maximum suggested thickness of a switch to
beat your wife with...about the dia. Of your thumb..
 althought here in the states it seems to be the suggested minimum
standard for ones wife to stick said item up his arse.
-x

-----Original Message-----
From: moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org
[mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of Case
Sent: Friday, February 09, 2007 12:03 AM
To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Subject: Re: [MD] Dawkins a Materialist (is watching?)

Micah,

Upon reflection I think I may have figured out the source of your
difficulty. Being Americans we still measure things in feet. We eyeball
estimates of length. We use rules of thumb. Now our more enlightened
English brethren have moved to the metric system but I suspect them
still have rules of thumb. The point is these are metaphors and you are
taking them literally.

Case

p.s. It must have been hard for you to make it through three posts
without saying MITMOAT. Is there a 12 Step program for that?

-----Original Message-----
From: moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org
[mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of Micah
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 11:03 PM
To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Subject: Re: [MD] Dawkins a Materialist (is watching?)

Case,

Or your misunderstanding of Pirsig. See I can be condescending too!

Micah

-----Original Message-----
From: moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org
[mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org]On Behalf Of Case
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 6:46 AM
To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Subject: Re: [MD] Dawkins a Materialist (is watching?)

It seems that the problem is not so much with other misunderstanding
your position as with you misunderstanding your own position.

So you think I am a mystic? Cool, one more for the bumper.

Case

-----Original Message-----
From: moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org
[mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of Micah
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 12:03 AM
To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Subject: Re: [MD] Dawkins a Materialist (is watching?)

Case,

Could you be further off from my point?

You have tried to brand me a solipsist many times, I get it. I must not
be able to convey my point, because you seem to miss half of it.
Shouldn't a mystic like yourself just stick to rubbing your TITS, and
ignore me instead of mischaracterizing my position? Or Kant you do that?

Micah

-----Original Message-----
From: moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org
[mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org]On Behalf Of Case
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 10:44 AM
To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Subject: Re: [MD] Dawkins a Materialist (is watching?)

Micah,

The key point that you have thus far steadfastly refused to acknowledge
is that in following the line of thinking you suggest, you have no
business talking about what other humans or Man in the plural
experiences. You are advocating some weird brand of solipsism. This is
cool because there really is no logic that can be brought to bear on it.
It is however almost universally thought to be a silly thing to think.

Case

-----Original Message-----
From: moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org
[mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of Micah
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 11:04 AM
To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Subject: Re: [MD] Dawkins a Materialist (is watching?)

Platt,

So now let me understand, you say "it is true that the inference of of
independent existence cannot be demonstrated", so you agree that nothing
can be shown to exist independent of  humans? Meaning the statement is
fact regardless of your faith? Isn't that objectivity?

On what day, of your everyday experience, have you experienced reality
to exist independent of humans? Everyday I wake up, my right ankle hurts
for an instant, I believe it is a angel pinching me for good luck -
should I doubt that philosophically, after all it's what I believe and
you have stated I shouldn't doubt my beliefs.

You have too much clutter, and that clutter is your faith. And you won't
let go...so there you are.

Micah

-----Original Message-----
From: moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org
[mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org]On Behalf Of Platt Holden
Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 6:39 AM
To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Subject: [MD] Dawkins a Materialist (is watching?)

Quoting Micah <micah at roarkplumbing.com>:

> "Nothing can be shown to exist independent of humans" is an objective 
> statement. It is fact.

Not an objective fact, only a logical truism. It is true that the
inference of of independent existence cannot be demonstrated. But we
justify such belief pragmatically: we act and survive in the world by
assuming it. We should not doubt in philosophy what we believe from
everyday experience to be the case.

Platt

moq_discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/