Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!uflorida!mephisto!rutgers!cmcl2!panix!gcf
From: gcf@panix.UUCP (J. S. B'ach)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: SCI.philosophy.objectivism
Keywords: Objectivism, Sci.philosophy.objectivism
Message-ID: <863@panix.UUCP>
Date: 5 Feb 90 18:31:22 GMT
References: <CMM.0.88.633891635.bfu@skakke.uio.no> <11909@goofy.megatest.UUCP> <7434@tank.uchicago.edu>
Reply-To: gcf@panix.UUCP (Gordon Fitch)
Organization: Beauty in the Beast
Lines: 30

djones@megatest.UUCP (Dave Jones) writes:
)>I would like to have talk.philosophy.objectivism, because as an ex-
)>Objectivist, I would welcome the opportunity to air out the reasons why
)>I abandoned it. ...

rwt1@tank.uchicago.edu (Robert Tracinski) writes:
)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. Those who do not 
)agree with Objectivism are welcome, but the purpose of the group demands that 
)they only post if they are willing to be serious about the issues and 
)consider what the Objectivists have to say. ...  sci ... indicates that the
)group is for serious and in-depth discussion, and people tend to think their
)postings out more thoroughly on such a group. Whereas the talk title all too 
)often signals that people will feel free to post *whatever* happens to come to
)mind, whether it is intelligent and thoughtful or not.

In other words, a vote for sci, as opposed to talk, etc., is a
vote on the validity of Objectivism; if you vote yes, it means
you think that Objectivism might be scientifically valid and is
a worthy subject of serious discussion.  In that case those of 
us who find Objectivism invalid, or silly, will have to vote no.
While I find the religious worship of the sci prefix pretty 
silly in itself, if we're called to pass judgment on a particular
philosophy as a community, I guess we have to do it.

I would think Objectivists would rather have a newsgroup than a
referendum, but suit yourselves.