Being in the world--there was a punchline??

Jim Jaszewski jjazz at freenet.hamilton.on.ca
Sat Nov 11 23:56:00 MST 1995


On Sat, 11 Nov 1995, Robert Peter Burns wrote:

> Let me ask Jim Jaszewski a question: does he think that what he
> has written below is right or rational or correct?  If so, is he
> not relying on a presupposition of the normative validity of his
> own reasoning processes? 

	Like I didn't know you were going to take this line...

	I still stand by what I said: Ethics and `rational thought' are
not any more `out there' than is the `aether' 19th Century physicists
looked for... 

 If he is, how can he simultaneously
> rely on the normative validity of his reasoning processes to 
> cast doubt on the reality, meaningfulness and validity of normative/
> logical/rational relations, and claim that they are merely natural
> <presumably causal?> relations involving natural organisms?  Is
> this not incoherent?

	I'll state it more clearly:  YOU THINK TOO MUCH ABOUT NOTHING.

	By your twisted logic, of COURSE I can't PROVE nuthin', but by MY
logic, the `proof is in the pudding'...  Cogito; ergo: _sum_ -- n'est-ce
pas??  What a nightmare.  Pull myself up by my own bootstraps (sounds
positively capitalistic...)

	Using yer basic familiar Razor of Occam, I can reiterate: 
Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof.  I exist.  You exist.  
This world is real.  We're animals.  Some animals spend a LOT of their 
time thinking useless shit.

	If I can't understand why I act, I also won't ascribe it to some 
Platonic ectoplasm of emotion and `reason'`out there' somewhere.

	
  On the other hand, perhaps Jim doesn't
> think that what he has written below is right or rational or correct.
> Perhaps he is conceding that it has no normative validity, but
> is mere "projection" of his own "abstractions" or a "survival strategy"
> on his part.  But then why should I bother to answer him?

	Why indeed?  Why even bother to come onto an atheistic List?

  Or 
> perhaps Jim is here conceding something I suggested in a previous 
> post; namely that he might have some difficulty in proving he has 
> a mind.  Is that a funny enough punchline for you, Jim?  And can 
> we drop it *now*?

	Geeze; a komedian...  

	You *don't* have to reply...



+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-+
|                    stop the execution of Mumia Abu-Jamal                   |
|             if you agree copy these 3 sentences in your own sig            |
|         more info: http://www.xs4all.nl/~tank/spg-l/sigaction.htm          |
+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-+
| Jim Jaszewski <jjazz at freenet.hamilton.on.ca>     PGP Public Key available. |
| http://www.freenet.hamilton.on.ca/~ab975/Profile.html                      |
+=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-+




     --- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---



More information about the Marxism mailing list