Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site umcp-cs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!umcp-cs!mangoe
From: mangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP (Charley Wingate)
Newsgroups: net.religion.christian
Subject: Re: The Harumpheror's Old Clothes
Message-ID: <996@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 25-Jul-85 17:24:21 EDT
Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.996
Posted: Thu Jul 25 17:24:21 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 27-Jul-85 00:33:07 EDT
References: <488@cmu-cs-k.ARPA>
Organization: U of Maryland, Computer Science Dept., College Park, MD
Lines: 21

In article <488@cmu-cs-k.ARPA> tim@cmu-cs-k.ARPA (Tim Maroney) writes:

>Yo, Rich, you missed another of Dubois's fallacies.  He belittles you for
>basing your reasons for being moral on your likes and dislikes (specifically
>your like of survival).  But what is Dubois's reason for accepting Christian
>morality?  Because he believes he'll go to Heaven if he does and to Hell if
>he doesn't, that's why!  Why would he prefer Heaven to Hell?

>Because he dislikes pain.  He ... DISLIKES it?  HE DISLIKES IT!
>PRO---FOUND!!  If that's what it boils down to, let's all stop reading
>Dubois's articles.

Wrongo.  It isn't Paul, after all, that is claiming total objectivity.  If
this sinks his argument, then it sinks Rich's all the more, since Rich is
denying the validity of appealing to intuition and feelings.

Charley Wingate   umcp-cs!mangoe

"Do you know what this means?

       It means this damn thing doesn't work at all!"