From: David McFadzean (david@lucifer.com)
Date: Thu Mar 21 2002 - 07:21:00 MST
Thanks for writing. Here are some quick answers. If you want more detailed
discussion, please consider posting your questions on the BBS.
1. I don't see anything wrong with taking advice from an authority. That
doesn't mean your reason for living is to serve them.
2. Yes, true convictions are harmless, false convictions are dangerous. The
problem is that you can never be sure if a conviction is true or false, and
convictions are not questioned by definition. If all your beliefs are open
to questioning and change, then you at least have the possibility of getting
rid of the dangerous ones. We distinguish between dogma and doctrine. Dogma
is beyond questioning, out doctrine is tentative and always open for
reevaluation and change.
David
----- Original Message -----
From: <keir@nothingtolose.co.uk>
To: <david@lucifer.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2002 5:37 AM
Subject: virus... a few questions
Dear David,
I came across your great-looking site while looking for information on
wheather balloons.
I stopped to have a read through and, although I agreed with a lot of what
you had to say, I was a bit confused by certain bits.
I wondered if you could answer a few questions on these statements:
1. "don't let anyone convince you your reason for living is to serve some
higher authority." - from the introduction page
I can understand that sometimes people misuse their authority, or we allow
people innapropriate levels of authority.
However, can you expect someone to follow this advice if it doesn't come
from an authority? As for "higher", surely that's implied in "authority"?
For example, I trust a historian to advise me on history because his
knowledge and training are better than mine - I must accept his authority in
this area. But I wouldn't necessarily ask his advice on morals.
2. "Convictions are the end of knowledge, not the beginning; they are the
enemy of truth more than lies"
I agree that some convictions are dangerous and get in the way of learning
and improving our understanding of the world.
But aren't these convictions dangerous primarily because they are wrong -
that is, they are lies, not truth?
Isn't it much simpler to say "lies are bad, truth is good"?
Also, aren't all the truths expressed on this page convictions?
The online Miriam-Webster dictionary defines a dogma as:
2 : a doctrine or body of doctrines concerning faith or morals formally
stated and authoritatively proclaimed by a church
But your dogmas seem to exclude following any of your dogmas!
"we must constantly examine and re-evaluate our behaviour and the beliefs it
reflects."
I can definitely agree with that one.
Thanks for your time and effort,
Keir
***********************************
Email:kmh99@another.com
http://keirhopwood.tripod.com/
Tel. (0044) <721> 6904616
Mob. (0044) 01798 699 138
Postal Address:
Keir Hopwood C/O Johanna Fahey,
Zimmer A24, K1-Gebäude,
HaDiKo, 76131 Karlsruhe,
DEUTSCHLAND
-- Personalised email by http://another.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 25 2002 - 13:28:45 MDT