Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site utastro.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!ut-sally!utastro!padraig
From: padraig@utastro.UUCP (Padraig Houlahan)
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Re: Hit and run
Message-ID: <77@utastro.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 11-May-85 13:35:16 EDT
Article-I.D.: utastro.77
Posted: Sat May 11 13:35:16 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 13-May-85 00:38:09 EDT
References: <2115@decwrl.UUCP>
Organization: U. Texas, Astronomy, Austin, TX
Lines: 29

> Didn't they have any philosophy courses in tech school?  I guess not.
> Next you'll be telling us philosophy has nothing to do with 'science'.
> 
> How does it feel to be a 19th century man in the 20th century?
> 
> You are not alone of course.  There are some of your fellow time travellers
> on net.origins too.
> 
> Keep chargin'
> 
> Ken Arndt

Given the choice I think that I'd prefer to be from the 19th century, if
you represent 20th century man. No, I have'nt taken philosophy 301, and
don't think I ever will if the best it can produce are 20th century folks
who confuse the obscure with the profound and produce gems like god
is the underground of beans etc. :-)

Did your philosophy courses teach you that personal invective is a good
substitute for sound reasoning? Did it teach you that you can get points
by attacking people who might not be aware of your attacks? 
You seem to think that claiming to be of the 20th century automatically
validates your point of view, and that calling others "19th century"
men is sufficient to refute their opinions. In other postings you have
likened other debaters to thirteen year-olds.  Perhaps you could let us
out here in netland know the reasons for your fetish's with timescales
as being criteria for good philosophy?

Padraig Houlahan.