From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!olivea!uunet!wupost!darwin.sura.net!Sirius.dfn.de!math.fu-berlin.de!news.netmbx.de!unido!mcsun!uknet!edcastle!aiai!jeff Tue Mar 24 09:55:05 EST 1992
Article 4405 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!olivea!uunet!wupost!darwin.sura.net!Sirius.dfn.de!math.fu-berlin.de!news.netmbx.de!unido!mcsun!uknet!edcastle!aiai!jeff
>From: jeff@aiai.ed.ac.uk (Jeff Dalton)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: mean,meaner,MEANING-est/ intention-and-self the buddhist way
Message-ID: <6382@skye.ed.ac.uk>
Date: 11 Mar 92 16:34:36 GMT
References: <98kG02Qo92X500@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> <1992Mar10.002256.8754@norton.com>
Sender: news@aiai.ed.ac.uk
Organization: AIAI, University of Edinburgh, Scotland
Lines: 13

In article <1992Mar10.002256.8754@norton.com> brian@norton.com (Brian Yoder) writes:

Re: Buddhism

>I had not intended to get into a theological argument here, but it looks
>like there actually ARE some people here who feel inclined to take this
>seriously.  Before we start, would you agree that something being mystically
>founded means that it is in fact unfounded?  Or would you say that potentially
>you could say about some idea "Sure it's mysticism, but I think it's a good 
>basis for building my AI machine."?

You are in the grip of the fallacy that the origin of an idea
determines its truth.  


