Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!hookup!news.kei.com!hermes.oc.com!internet.spss.com!markrose
From: markrose@spss.com (Mark Rosenfelder)
Subject: Re: Deathworshipper
Message-ID: <Cz4Dyt.CIJ@spss.com>
Sender: news@spss.com
Organization: SPSS Inc
References: <39rmkv$353@newsbf01.news.aol.com> <39tiv5$rse@tadpole.fc.hp.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 1994 20:23:16 GMT
Lines: 55

In article <39tiv5$rse@tadpole.fc.hp.com>,
Brent Allsop <allsop@fc.hp.com> wrote:
>Josh Stern said:
>> Let's reserve the use of this term to discussions on theology
>> newsgroups.
>
>	Why?  Marvin's use of this word here is the first time I've
>herd it.  I think it is great.  Thank You Marvin!  I've been wanting a
>word like this for a long time.  I assume it refers to people like
>Christians that think one must die to get to heaven or anyone that
>believes that death is important like this.  These people must repent
>of their vial, evil, irrational, damaging, illogical, viral, "boat
>anchor to progress", cowardice, ways according to many people.
>Worshiping death the way they do is so corruptive, pessimistic and
>full of despair.  Western society is highly infected with these
>openly-thriving, and destructive memes.  People knock on your doors
>pushing them, People stand in the streets touting them, books
>containing them are put in hotel rooms, they permeate the
>media... It's impossible to get away from it all even if you do avoid
>the many newsgroups that support them.  The best vaccination is
>education, and true understanding.  Coming up with and using names
>such as "Deathworshippers" to point out what they are in reality is
>very productive towards such good ends.  All this calling to
>repentance by both the Deathworshippers and the non deathworshippers
>is good.  One SHOULD proclaim what they believe.  Even if one is
>wrong, proclaiming such will allow others to understand and point out
>where they are wrong.  We should not be ashamed of any of it in any
>forum IMHO.  Humility and an honest willingness to hear an apposing
>point off view is the important part!  Through this process, the one
>that is really the sinner is more likely to realize the error of their
>ways, repent, and live a much more productive and happy life.  It
>seems to me that the primary difference between philosophy and
>theology is that one values rationality a bit more.  Don't they both
>have the fundamental goal of discovering so that we may ALL live the
>best possible life?  There's nothing wrong with philosophy rationally
>adopting some of the theological tactics such as the use of vivid and
>emotionally powerful names and words IMHO.  It greatly enhances the
>thriveability of good, productive, and antiviral memes.

I do hope you'll tell me you're kidding.  Inventing new terms of abuse can
be amusing, and I took Prof. Minsky's use of the term as a valid, even
understated response to what was after all a vitriolic personal attack on him.
However, you seem to be seriously a) thinking that the term characterizes
some people's beliefs; b) mistaking your use of an emotion-laden term of abuse
as an objective description ("in reality"); c) advocating the increased use
of emotion and abuse in philosophical discussions; and d) confusing this
somehow with "rationality".  

By the way, has it occurred to you that your beliefs are in perfect 
accordance with the notion you attribute to the vile and evil, namely that
"death is important"?  A belief that death is *unimportant* would presumably
mean acceptance of death as an ordinary and not particularly interesting
aspect of life.  Railing at death, preoccupation with mortality and 
immortality, and condemnation of those who accept death calmly, all put very
great importance on death... face it, Brent, you're a deathworshipper!
