>I don't believe i was being sanctimonious, olin,  by saying that nationalism 
>is abhorrent.  i was simply stating my opinion.  i will maintain that the 
>didactic, righteous, >dogmatists tend to come from the emotional right wing 
>religious fanatics (many of whom believe in creationism and reject global 
>warming) rather than the more rational >leftist secular progressive, 
>pragmatists.
>jon

at the presnet moment, I agree with you.  But the history of the left has more 
than its share of dogmatism, irrationality, and craziness.  Try suggesting on 
most college campus that things like, say, the relative aptitudes of men and 
women in different fields in an empiracal question and should be studied 
scientifically.  You will be shouted down by leftist, "progressive" feminists.  
The response will be just as emotional and non-rational.  There's a strong 
ant-sciene bias in modern American liberalism, resistance to ideas about the 
inheritance of temerpment or personality, the primacy of biology over culture, 
etc. etc.  The right has just been more blantant, more vocal and more ludicrous 
in their attacks on science, but they don't have a monopoly on it.

Olin
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Jon Louis Mann<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
  To: Killer Bs (David Brin et al) Discussion<mailto:brin-l@mccmedia.com> 
  Sent: Friday, August 29, 2008 2:58 PM
  Subject: Sore losers


  > of course I'm being self-righteous -- notice that I was
  > very careful to use inclusive language throughout what I
  > wrote, even noting that we should all go back and read Dr.
  > Brin's article.  I'm one of the worst -- only in the
  > last half-decade or so of my life have I learned to
  > (usually) avoid taking a verbal sledgehammer to anyone I
  > disagree with.  Socrates said that if he was the wiesest man
  > in Athens, it was only because he knew that he didn't
  > know anything.   None of us is going to eliminate these
  > tendencies (short of genetic modification). I'd bet that
  > even the Dalia Llama (if you don't like Buddhists please
  > insert the religious or secular saint of your choice) would
  > admit that he hasn't elmintated those traits.   Its like
  > a computer that goes back to its default settings every time
  > you turn it off.  The best we can do is try to always be
  > aware of it and allow for it -- and we won't even
  > succeed at that a lot of the time, which is why feedback,
  > mutual criticism and transpa
  >  rency are so important.  And we have to set these systems
  > up -- both in the public sector and our own lives -- during
  > the times when we're relatively sane, because once
  > we're into our self-righteousness and our indignation
  > and all that other stuff, we're not going to want to be
  > corrected.  Just look around the world today, at all the
  > groups pointing weapons (physical and intellectual) at each
  > other, and all the damage we're doing to the world
  > because we're sure that we're right and we're
  > most imporant -- and its not just one country or one
  > political party, although I'll admit some are worse than
  > others. I believe it's the single most imporatant issue
  > we face.  We either deal with it -- we either adapt to the
  > new conditions our species faces -- or we die.
  > Olin

  I don't believe i was being sanctimonious, olin,  by saying that nationalism 
is abhorrent.  i was simply stating my opinion.  i will maintain that the 
didactic, righteous, dogmatists tend to come from the emotional right wing 
religious fanatics (many of whom believe in creationism and reject global 
warming) rather than the more rational leftist secular progressive, pragmatists.
  jon


        
  _______________________________________________
  
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l<http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l>
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to