arndt@squirt.DEC (10/07/85)
'O' says: "I always thought that a good part of the point of free speech is that it implicitly says that nobody _knows_ the truth so nobody should make decisions for everyone else." Aside from the fact that what he? says has nothing to do with 'free speech' (including the 'movement' - remember that? - which made saying dirty words fun because it made us free from feeling guilty about it, manners, and getting our mouths washed out with soap by Mom!) what he says sounds like he woke up in Phil.101 about the time Pyrrho the Sceptic floated up from the depths. "We can be certain of nothing, not even of the most trivial assertions. Therefore we ought never to make any positive statements on any subject." (from W.T.Stace A CRITICAL HISTORY OF GREEK PHILOSOPHY,London: Macmillan & Co. '46. p.362.) Ole Pyrrho, like 'O' I imagine, was a very funny fellow. No catagories, no certainty about anything, no choices to make and no stands to take - because of course (the death knell of the 'throughly modern man' of the 20th C Phil.101 course!) "Who are YOU to decide??" Anyway, one day ole Pyrrho was frightened by a dog and climbed a tree from which he was rescued by a tolerant (and laughing?) friend who accused him of being inconsistant for deciding about what to do about the dog when it came after him. Ole Pyrrho replied that it was indeed hard not to come to some decisions! Perhaps he would, if pressed, said that he would only decide for himself! (see Mary Mills Patrick, THE GREEK SCEPTICS, NY, Columbia U. Pr., p.276.) Of course one can ask 'O' how he knows nobody knows . . . and nobody should make decisions for everyone else (isn't THAT a decision for everyone???) just as one could ask Pyrrho if his ". . . we ought never to make any positive statements on any subject." is not ITSELF a positive statement. Er, . . . given what 'O' says about free speech, on what grounds does one say either "Kill all the homos" or "Leave them alone"??? Or that one opposes either statement??? Hmmmm, maybe one could say them both and oppose them both at the same time while drinking a glass of wine (screw top of course)! All of which is a long-winded way of saying 'O's idea of free speech is really no speech but more like bird song. By now no one else is reading this (I always read my own stuff all the way through) and you have all gone back to worrying about AIDS and are you as pretty as you used to be, blah, blah, whine, whimper. Let's see, while I have my attention I'll tell me about why I missed the Brighten MOTSS "Come and Pat the Pony" Party. The truth is I wanted to go but I couldn't shake Mayhem (his real name is Mayhue but don't ever call him that!!) and he wanted to bash 'the queers', "please can I huh?, huh?". As I have told myself before here (no one else ever heard me) I don't go in for that and would have to act to stop such a thing if it happened in front of me. It was a big mistake to tell Mayhem about the party in the first place. He's a shootin' buddy at the club and we go back a while. Spend weekends in the woods with the gang practicing small unit tactics with our assault rifles and K-bar and face paint. Just good ole boys all. Beer, war stories and a few surface cuts and a good time was had by all. (If any of you want to slip into one or OUR parties let me know but PLEASE no swishers! Promise you will talk about broads and not stare at anyone taking a pee.) Now Mayhem (you may guess how he got his name) is BIG and a real hard core kinda guy. The 'Nam did something to his brains. Too many loud noises and screams in the night. He says it all builds up inside his head like snakes and he has to let it out. He stabs things with his jungle knife - once he even cut himself in the leg before he stopped - usually trees, the ground, etc. It passes. His idea of a joke ain't always mine. My wife says he will never enter our house. Can't really blame her. Sometimes he looks at you funny. I always make sure I'm on HIS side when we break up into opposing forces. One night around a campfire he started to tell some really bad stuff about the 'Nam and got really mad. He scared me and I actually had to yell "INCOMING!" and beat feet outta there. It's one thing to see it one the silver screen and another to know some time-phaser is actually out there in the bushes with you. Anyway guys, I couldn't bring ole Mahem along with me. He's just not the live and let live philosopher that I am. Maybe next time, eh? Say, did God try to keep you from gettin' together?? Gloria I mean. Don't suppose it stopped ya, huh? Well, good night Ken. Good night.
gerber@mit-amt.MIT.EDU (Andrew S. Gerber) (10/08/85)
<EAT ME, NASTY LINE EATER>
As most of you have probably noticed, Mr. Arndt has been posting his
innane comments on life to net.motss again.
I made the mistake of replying once before. I caution you, DON'T! Ken
is not out to discuss anything. He is out to argue, insult, and just
raise everyone's temperatures. For example:
(from nearly a year ago)
Doesn't hurt you, eh? As long as you don't get AIDS (which
we all understand doesn't have ANYTHING to do with
homosexual behavior and practice, or any other cute little
disease) or you are not phychologically damaged (as any
heterosexual - see Perlow?) by promiscuity. And no need
for you hurt yourself by missing out on a family with
children - you can always adopt (with a little change to
the laws - like ERA). And never to know that one woman
who above all others fills your life as a woman, to
stand beside her as she gives birth to your child -
Doesn't hurt you? YOU LEAPING SCREAMING ASSHOLE!!
Happily, he disappaered for quite a while after this flame. I hope
that noone make the mistake I did (hell - I was an innocent sophomore who
hadn't even used rn yet).
Yours in Moderation,
Andrew Gerber