Steve Kurtz:
> You really need a course in elementary logic. Try to diagram the causative
> links you are claiming. What does any of the above have to do with
> accepting that we ain't all clones, and that our social institutions can't
> make us as equal as you would like.
>
Would you kindly look up my past correspondence
never have I said that we are clones and that I expect any social
institution to make us equal. This is your misconception
of socialism as per the uncritically regurgitated propaganda.
Democratic socialism would be better at allowing us to be
individuals than capitalism ever can: economic oppression
means limited democracy.
> You really don't get it. People make their beds & sleep in them. I'm
> supporting not a fixed system, but shrinkage - of population, & of economic
> throughput/impact. I'd like zero interest rates, & NO MONEY SUPPLY GROWTH.
> All steady state once at sustainable rates/methods of production,
> distribution, and consumption. Now that sounds quite Utopian, but it
> doesn't mean that everyone's share would be identical; it means the
> wholesystem might endure for some longer period than with growthmania.
>
Capitalism cannot function without growth, if the rate of profit
decreases - and it does anyway - capitalism is in crisis.
What's wrong with having a distribution that allows everyone to
live freely and in dignity, rather than under an economic bridle.
> Another perverse induction. I indicated that historical & literary lore was
> based on group memories and passed on myths...cultural heritages. These
> indicate *differences* based both on nature & nurture.
>
So? Do these indications have necessarily a base in reality?
> > E.g. That wellknown fact of thousands years
> > of history that women cannot think rationally?
>
> Strawwoman :-)
>
No, you used this "historical literature" as evidence.
> You are so far out on a fantasy limb that I fear you're about to crash;
> maybe then you'd rejoin planet earth.
>
... I know and I learn my elementary logic,
straight after you learn yours.
thanks for patronising me ever so politely.
> > Must be, because I am a 100% east-European jew
> > ethnically and I haven't
> > done any of these things. Besides being tall.
>
> My *NAME* related to height. My ethnic background related to studious bent;
> your 2 univ degrees are consistent with that. My anecdotal story was merely
> an example of the differences between humans & cultures.
>
Even if it was true that jews tend towards intellectual stuff,
it is not genetic, it is a historical conditioning.
They were not allowed to own land in lots of countries,
they had to learn trades, they
had to learn, so ambitious learning is in family history.
>
> If you don't get the point of this**, I give up:
>
> > > recognition of the fact that all living organisms are self-steering within
> > > certain limits, and that their **behaviour therefore can be steered from the
> > > outside only to a very moderate extent.**
>
Social environment is more important feature in the development
of human behaviour than for animals. I cannot see any
of your cybernetic thingies giving evidence to the contrary.
Eva
> Steve
>
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
