The e-mails I get...

[Yolan]

And no I won't stop debating social matters. Never. They are far too important to be ignored.

Yes because it matters. Even on the internet where everything is like a big joke to so many, it matters.

[burgingham]

The latter part describes what I mean I think Ken. The part about the observer.

The question that natural science often forgets to ask these days is "Who observes the observer?" and what conclusions could be drawn from that?

I am highly critical towards how uncritical people deal with the results from scientific research these days. As I mentioned it is regarded as modern day's holy grail. That can quickly lead to extremism.

Dawkins is a prime example for that. I know I will be making a lot of enemies here now, but that guy is an extremist to me. In his way to force his understanding of enlightenment upon religious people he is no better than the ones he tries to "free". He is so caught up in his understanding of truth that he does not allow any gods next to that one anymore.*

Well, that is drifitng off to a whole other topic ^^

Thing is natural science should be more self-observant and also should learn to incorporate other sciences into its own patterns. Then it can regain its aspiration to explain the world. We must never forget that everything we know is ultimately something we ourselves constructed through our ways to communicate it.

*Btw Jorb you should love that and it should show you that this kind of implementing my ideals onto others is not what I want. I merely am asking for a fair and equal ground for everyone to debate things on and come to conclusions together.

@Yolan: Thank you, couldn't agree more.

[jorb]

@Jorb: If it were up to me every single person would have the option of reading those books.

I also never said these people could or should liberate themselves. That can only be done in a joined effort and I know that is utopean and maybe pretty naive. That does not mean one shouldn't start somewhere.

I think you want me to be ignorant because that is easier to understand then. I am well aware that not all shiny objects are in fact gold and reality isn't as easy as I have been putting it here sometimes. There are a lot of unanswered questions in my head about how to actually create equality, how to not regress to some form of patronizing those I would like to make their own decisions and so forth and so on.

Your statements of today were just confusing me a lot. I know some of our views a enot exactly congruent, but to read slogans like "Women belong in the kitchen" or "White supremacy" from you is disturbing and I am trying to sort out how you meant that and what you meant by that.

Alas you won't answer in a constructive manner. I mean even telling me I just misunderstood you there is fine for me to let me bury this hatchet.

And no I won't stop debating social matters. Never. They are far too important to be ignored.

Why do you take those last rants I made seriously? All I did was scream like a child and hurl random insults that could literally be programatically produced from your or nanos' statements by simply asserting the contrary, throwing in a random insult mashed up with a healthy dose of contempt, and then accuse you of being racist for saying whatever it was you said. There was literally not a single cogent argument presented by me, and yet you feel the need to defend yourself? Why is it that I get better responses from you through this tactic of shitty intimidation than I do when I actually present reasoned arguments?

That does not mean you have any right to mock me. At least I am trying to sort things out with myself and with others.

This one got to me. I don't. I'm trying to understand you. I really, really like you.

[burgingham]

Why do you take those last rants I made seriously? All I did was scream like a child and hurl random insults that could literally be programatically produced from your or nanos' statements by simply asserting the contrary, throwing in a random insult mashed up with a healthy dose of contempt, and then accuse you of being racist for saying whatever it was you said. There was literally not a single cogent argument presented by me, and yet you feel the need to defend yourself? Why is it that I get better responses from you through this tactic of shitty intimidation than I do when I actually present reasoned arguments?

The fact that I am not used to hearing such from you is probably what confused me so much. So, well done I guess

Edit: I also am really bored at work and many of these things I really needed to say...but to whom? A random internet forum is probably a good place to do so, especially since there are some real gems hidden between all the filth browsing these boards...even though they usually happen to be pearls disagreeing with me ^^

[RedKGB]

Yeah, I'm such an idiot for disbelieving that livestock defies laws of conservation of mass and energy.

No your an idiot, when proven from your own research that yes, it is possible, you fall back on people not being able to own land in thrid world countries. Next your livestock being free range and only live a life that way, when showen that yes they can live a different way, you fall back on people in thrid world countries not owning chickens. You are talking about something you do not know, and that is what makes you a useful idiot, someone I belivie to be very smart, but unless it fits thier narrow view of the world, they refuse to open thier minds to other possibilities.

[dagrimreefah]

Dawkins is a prime example for that. I know I will be making a lot of enemies here now, but that guy is an extremist to me. In his way to force his understanding of enlightenment upon religious people he is no better than the ones he tries to "free". He is so caught up in his understanding of truth that he does not allow any gods next to that one anymore.*

I'm getting scared now. I am in agreeance with you again :O

Just for the record, I am an atheist, but I have always felt that Dawkins goes too far. I believe he does so because it pays well.

[Potjeh]

Hello, the whole discussion was on whether wage slaves can fall back on subsistence farming. Try reading before posting, 9 out of 10 internets experts recommend it.

[RedKGB]

Hello, the whole discussion was on whether wage slaves can fall back on subsistence farming. Try reading before posting, 9 out of 10 internets experts recommend it.

I feel sorry for your offspring. But thats ok, I well them too.

[Jackard]

There is no difference between any human and any other human in the moment they leave that womb. Every difference is formed after and is formed by such factors as parent, friends, education, society, culture etc.

Don't want to get involved, just been following the topic and I had to laugh at this statement. There is a huuuge debate going on about nature vs nurture and you just completely ignored the nature side. There have been tons of studies that prove people are not the same when they leave the womb. This has been proven in studies where orphan twin or triplet or x children are given out on adoption, and all have a very high correlation in the grades they get, a lot more like their biological parents and biological siblings that they have never met, and very different from the people that adopted them and their non-biological family.

They prove what, aptitude?

[Potjeh]

Illiterate & proud, God bless America!