Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!jqb
From: jqb@netcom.com (Jim Balter)
Subject: Re: Minsky's new article
Message-ID: <jqbCyz7AK.Fr9@netcom.com>
Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest)
References: <39bl8t$gjs@cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu> <39lf4g$9rg@coli-gate.coli.uni-sb.de> <1994Nov8.050237.13714@news.media.mit.edu> <39nhs8$2jc@coli-gate.coli.uni-sb.de>
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 1994 01:11:07 GMT
Lines: 26

In article <39nhs8$2jc@coli-gate.coli.uni-sb.de>,
Sean Matthews <sean@mpi-sb.mpg.de> wrote:
>Lets go back to the `confirmed deathworshipper' tag though, which I
>find interesting.  It is a bit stylised to be something you dreamed up
>on just to waste on me, so I'll hypothesise that it is the standard
>tag you use to label people who not only do not take your ideas
>entirely seriously, but do not accept that you are the way, the the
>truth and the light; i.e. anyone who does not believe (with their
>whole, if problematical, soul) in your particular promise of
>immortality.

It's interesting to note that this thread is based upon your short, inaccurate,
mean-spirited characterization of Minsky's SciAm article (which you, in
an amazing display of intellectual dishonesty, self-characterized as "fair")
that omitted most of its content and misrepresented the tone of the portion
that it did pertain to.  Thus it is not terribly surprizing that you are not
aware that Minsky made it quite clear what he means by this phrase in the
concluding paragraphs of that article.

>I don't have your (literal) blind faith in technology. On the other
>hand, I have enough experience with theological arguements to know
>that they never get anywhere.

Then why did you start this one?
-- 
<J Q B>
