Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site mmm.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!mmm!mrgofor
From: mrgofor@mmm.UUCP (MKR)
Newsgroups: net.philosophy,net.sci
Subject: Re: Contempt prior to Investigation
Message-ID: <640@mmm.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 19-Mar-86 13:47:13 EST
Article-I.D.: mmm.640
Posted: Wed Mar 19 13:47:13 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 21-Mar-86 06:39:47 EST
References: <435@ccivax.UUCP> <13400007@uiucdcsp> <12239@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> <358@unirot.UUCP>
Reply-To: mrgofor@mmm.UUCP (MKR)
Organization: none
Lines: 79
Xref: watmath net.philosophy:4544 net.sci:621

In article <358@unirot.UUCP> cjr@unirot.UUCP (Charles Riordan) writes:
>In article <12239@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>, weemba@brahms.BERKELEY.EDU (Matthew P. Wiener) writes:
>> In article <13400007@uiucdcsp> bsmith@uiucdcsp.CS.UIUC.EDU writes:
>> >To the point at hand.  Very few things threaten "scientists" more than
>> >the mention of the worthiness of paranormal phenomena.  I usually get
>> >a great deal of enjoyment over watching these people spew forth an
>> 
>> I would say the reaction is DISGUST, solely out of the exaggerated claims
>> of the paranormalists.  Your claim that there is an "incredible volume of
>> evidence" in favor of the paranormal is one such.  Evidence to scientists
>> consists mostly of either repeatable experiments or conclusions drawn from
>> a world picture based on repeatable experiments.  What does it matter to
>
>Look, it's mighty clear to me you just don't want to believe. I mean, I
>have friends who can make their plants grow better by talking to them,
>but you probably don't want to believe that either. Anything that
>conflicts with your autocratic Western thinking is the work of a "nut
>case", right, man? You've been brainwashed by this mathematical
>scientific mumbo jumbo. It makes me kinda glad I didn't take those subjects
>in college, so I wouldn't get my minds cluttered with that stuff.
>
>You are being dogmatic, but thats typical of your dogmatic Western thinking.
>You should get exposed to some real science, the culture of the great
>Eastern mystics. My friend Pete knows one of them real well, and he has
>learned a lot from him. Only when you leave your Western mind behind and
>let your Eastern mind attach itself to the truths of Eastern wisdom will
>you have any understanding of the knowledge you are ignoring because of
>your closed brain system. (Pete says this is sort of like left brain
>right brain kind of stuff, but it depends which way you're facing at the
>time.)
>
>> (Please reread my description of evidence before replying.)
>
>It's mighty clear to me that your Western definition of evidence is to
>limited to be worth anything. I mean, you would reject ESP, telephonesis,
>the Bremuda Triangle, ancient astronauts, and UFO's, and I KNOW they exist,
>because my aunt saw one! I have witnessed all of these things at least
>second hand, and probably so have you, but your dogmatic Western mind won't
>let you admit that.
>
>Peace,
>	CJ

	This last posting is so ridiculous that I suspect it of being satire,
but the lack of smiley faces and the poor spelling may indeed indicate that
he was serious. 

	Western science does indeed admit it when it's wrong, and is constantly
incorporating new ideas -IF THEY'RE PROVEN. As a matter of fact, the very 
nature of the scientific community guarantees the incorporation of new ideas.
You seem to view scientists as a monolithic conspiracy of people trying
desperately to suppress the truth.

	In fact, scientists *compete* with one another, and if any of them
discover new facts, you can be assured that they will gladly publish them.
If the new facts challenge the old ideas, the supporter of the new ideas
will be argued against and possibly even ridiculed - but facts are facts,
and if they're PROVABLE, they will ultimately triumph and the majority
of scientists will change their ideas. If they're not provable, they are
not given much creedence. That is the way it *should* be.

	One more thing - you say:

>I mean, you would reject ESP, telephonesis,
>the Bremuda Triangle, ancient astronauts, and UFO's, and I KNOW they exist,
>because my aunt saw one! I have witnessed all of these things at least
>second hand, and probably so have you, but your dogmatic Western mind won't
>let you admit that.

	Witnessed these thing second hand? Give me a break. Read my
signature - it applies to you.


-- 
					--MKR

"The majority of the stupid is invincible and guaranteed for all time. The 
 terror of their tyranny, however, is alleviated by their lack of consistency."
						- Albert Einstein