Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!yale!husc6!seismo!gatech!akgua!akguf!akguc!codas!mtune!mtuxo!houxm!ihnp4!ihlpf!cher
From: cher@ihlpf.UUCP (Mike Cherepov)
Newsgroups: talk.philosophy.misc
Subject: Re: Emotion and Logic
Message-ID: <712@ihlpf.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 11-Sep-86 15:17:54 EDT
Article-I.D.: ihlpf.712
Posted: Thu Sep 11 15:17:54 1986
Date-Received: Mon, 15-Sep-86 05:24:42 EDT
References: <11700119@inmet> <11700370@inmet> <698@ihlpf.UUCP> <15628@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 19

>     There are PLENTY of things that are true because I want them to be true. 
> 
>     The only sensible way I know to judge something so complex as an
>     ideology is to look at its advocates and what they are doing and
>     then decide whether I like the resulting personalities and their
>     actions.
Gee, can't assert anything anymore without being blasted from all
directions for every real or imaginary falla.., mistake, that is.
How about internal consistency as your criterion?? 
Nazism is weak on it, for example. 
I try to choose the position with most self-contradiction.
Why do I do that, you ask? 
- I confess, because I like consistency. It seems like a fundamental
fondness, though. No ideology I know of declared itself inconsistent.
And 2+2=4 is a part of pretty consistent net of axioms and theorems.
Ah, have to get back to work. Actually I wonder if the search
for consistency is an emotion.... I seems like trying not to be non 
self-contradictory is a logical thing ?-)
		Mike Cherepov