Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!decwrl!megatest!djones
From: djones@megatest.UUCP (Dave Jones)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: SCI.philosophy.objectivism
Message-ID: <11927@goofy.megatest.UUCP>
Date: 3 Feb 90 05:38:23 GMT
References: <7434@tank.uchicago.edu>
Organization: Megatest Corporation, San Jose, Ca
Lines: 45

From article <7434@tank.uchicago.edu>, by rwt1@tank.uchicago.edu (Robert Tracinski):
> In article <11909@goofy.megatest.UUCP> I (djones@goofy) writes:
>>
>> ... I think it would be fun to talk it out.
> 
> This is precisely the sort of thing that is entirely *in*appropriate for any
> Objectivism newsgroup. Sci.philosophy.objectivism is not being proposed
> because some people think it might be "fun" to talk about "what's wrong with
> Objectivism".  It is being proposed to provide a place for serious
> discussion about technical aspects of the philosophy of Objectivism.

Please accept heartfelt my apology. I promise not to have any
fun talking about Objectivistism, which is a very serious branch of Science,
with lots of technical aspects badly in need of serious discussion and
a place to put it.

I guess I've just been having too much fun lately. It has something to do
with having moved to Northern California, I think. Back in Ohio, and before
that in Texas, where you can't swing your arms without hitting an Objectivist,
absolutely nobody had any fun. Here fun seems to be commonplace,
almost respectable. Nor is it restricted to frivolous activities like
surfing, music, sex and the like. They have fun discussing philosophy and
the other branches of science. Even the serious ones! Some people even seem
to enjoy having good natured fun poked at them occasionally. Yes, I know
that sounds sick, almost non-objective, but believe me, I've seen it happen.

To make amends, and to prove my sincerity, I hereby propose that the
group be called

             sci.philosophy.objectivists-only.serious

and that only Objectivists be allowed to vote for or against its creation.
It should be moderated to exclude those who show any signs
of mirth or joyfulness. (In this we can be guided by the sex scenes in
Rand's books.)

Furthermore, I wish to go on record now, and herewith post my vote
_against_ rec.humor.objectivism.

In retrospect, I think I may have fallen too much under the influence
of the late Walt Kelly, a suspected non-objectivist sympathizer, who in
the guise of a cartoon opossum named Pogo said, "Don't take life too
serious. It ain't no ways permanent."  About all that can be said in Kelly's
defense is that he was at least consistent enough in his beliefs to prove his
point by example.