Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!apple!bbn!bbn.com!djoslin
From: djoslin@bbn.com (David Joslin)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: On anti-Objectivist postings in *.p.o
Message-ID: <51700@bbn.COM>
Date: 4 Feb 90 18:48:34 GMT
References: <T8I1KIGxds8@ficc.uu.net>
Sender: news@bbn.COM
Reply-To: djoslin@plato.bbn.com (David Joslin)
Organization: BBN Advanced Computers, Inc., Cambridge MA
Lines: 25

In article <T8I1KIGxds8@ficc.uu.net> (jeff daiell) writes:
>If a non-O or anti-O posts to *.p.o, it might cause us to
>recheck our premises, thus (a) spurring the extension of
>Objectivist thought to new ground, and/or (b) strengthen
>our understanding of, and support for, Objectivism. 

Jeff,

When I read this I wondered why you didn't include
(c) cause some O'ists to realize that they have been in error.
It made it sound like you didn't think there was any 
possibility of O'ism being incorrect.

Then in another article you wrote:

>Still, this is a quibble.  Why don't we hold *one* vote:
>(1) I prefer sci.philosophy.objectivism ___
>(2) I prefer talk.philosophy.objectivism ___
>(3) No Objectivism group; I hate Reason, Purpose, and Self-Esteem ___

Do you mean to imply anyone who rejects O'ism lacks (or even hates?)
Self-Esteem?  That only O'ists appreciate Reason?  

David
djoslin@bbn.com