Pucc-H:aeq@CS-Mordred.UUCP (04/19/84)
I'm not sure I'll have enough time in the next week or two to read, let alone
reply to, all the stuff that has arrived here recently (particularly from
Rich Rosen). Not only do I have to get some work done sometime in order to
earn my pay, but I am also busy with other extracurricular activities (to wit,
acting in one theatrical production which opens next week, and designing
lighting for another).
Rich, I haven't yet read your "Comments (n)" series, but the titles don't make
it appear that you have yet addressed my basic question: Why do you
believe/assume that only that which can be physically proved is true, and that
there is no way to knowledge but the rational mind? This is such a sweeping
assumption that it really ought to be supported, since you use it to support
all your other attacks. (And yes, they are attacks; you quoted the definition
of "debunk" as including "ridicule", and that's certainly an attack.)
Needless to say, I consider it a false assumption....
I'll write more when I can.
--
-- Jeff Sargent
{allegra|ihnp4|decvax|harpo|seismo|ucbvax}!pur-ee!pucc-h:aeq
"Rivers belong where they can ramble..."