-----Original Message-----
From: drose <donangel@nlci.com>
To: moq_discuss@moq.org <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Date: Thursday, February 11, 1999 9:21 PM
Subject: Re: MD Values within values
>Horse, David, Xcto, Platt, Eric and Group, Greetings.
>
>I'm going to get myself deeper into this swamp, I fear.
>
>First, some easy stuff, though.
>
>Xcto: I don't capitalize it (drose); whether you do or not is irrelevant
>to me. It's a partial anagram of my name.
>
>I never did figure out what office supply your name represents, either.
>
>You wrote:
>
>> It's all a joke when you compare it to Nixon...
>
>Actually, and I make no defense of Nixon here, IMNSHO this is worse.
>This eats at the very foundation of the U.S.
>
>Platt: In my time on the forum I think I have read your posts and said
>"Yeah!" more than with any other member.
>
>Horse: You and I have a lot in common. I've been a longtime member and
>sometime officer of ABATE of Indiana. I love having my knees in the
>breeze and I too have been known to run with the "rough crowd". I've
>spent a lot of time wrangling over "rights", mine and others.
>
>I suspect we're getting into problems with defininitions. Socialism is
>antithetical to libertarianism, by any definition I of which I am aware.
>
>I guess I'll have to read Chomsky, now. Sometimes this group gets on my
>nerves :-)
>
>Group: In a nutshell, anytime the government coerces the individual for
>any reason, freedom is abridged. There is a certain amount of
>cooperation required for the survival of the guarantor of our freedom,
>i.e. the constitionally agreed upon gov't.
>
>The last 60 years have seen a steady encroachment of government into
>areas over which it has no legitimate authority. That it does so with
>the acquiescence of the "majority" does not make it right. It is my
>opinion that our government in its current manifestation is corrupt and
>unconstitutional, and so illegitimate.
>
>The battle of the two intellectual points of view is for the very soul
>of the nation.
>
>To invoke Libertarianism while empowering the State is illogical.
>
>David: I do not object to your assertion that there are racists (or any
>of a host of other -ists) in the Rep. Party. The ideology of the Rep.
>Party is not necessarily amenable to racists. The position of the party
>is that of a meritocracy. I think you mischaractrerize Hyde. Duke was
>also once a Democrat - as was Wallace. You'll find the -ists affiliated
>with either party. Even more have formed their own parties.
>
>The "inalienable" rights are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of
>Happiness.
>
>A minor correction - Slavery was ended by executive order of Lincoln, I
>believe.
>
>David wrote:
>
>> I'm fond of saying that Whitewater is alot like Watergate.
>> It both cases Republicans abused the institutions of government in an
>> attempt to destroy their political enemies.
>>
>This is a total misrepresentation of the truth. The fact that Starr
>obtained several convictions, including that of a sitting governor, over
>the course of the investigation means nothing?
>
>The fact the the Reps used the independent counsel law that the Dems set
>up to nail Reps is one of the better ironies of the whole sordid affair.
>
>It may be politically expedient to let our slimebucket of a president
>off the hook, but it will come back to bite us later.
>
>I'm just glad I voted Libertarian last time.
>
>> Even the U.S.
>> Presidency is a watered down version of this same warrior king
>> celebrated in ancient Rome.
>
>It didn't used to be that way. Hail, King Bill! Yecch. Hardly the
>"warrior" king, coward that he is.
>
>Jason: It is a mistake, I think, to use "intellectualize" as a synonym
>for "rationalize".
>
>drose
>
>
>MOQ Homepage - http://www.moq.org
>Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Dear Drose,
My opinion is that intellectualize and rationalize can be used as synonyms. If you note that in virtually all metaphysical theories the intellectual "area" ,or as you guys might like to say level, is always the place where rationalism lies. Thus the expression THE Rationalist. Namely Socrates, Plato, Descartes, and even William James. This rationalism proposes that Reason is the higest good, In other words Intellectual Truth. Sorry If I confused anyone. But hopefully you can see my point that rationalism is basically the same as intellectualism, at least in the sense of the ultimate idea that reason is the highest good.
Thank you,
Jason Nelson
>
MOQ Homepage - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:52 BST