[ExI] Humanity+ Talk Religion & transhumanism (not the usual!)

[Amon Zero]

On 5 September 2011 19:29, Adrian Tymes <atymes at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> She means the post has a lot of assumptions and inaccurate statements -
> too many to be worth listing individually, and so many that making a point
> by point rebuttal would take significant effort just to state each one (let
> alone state why that point is an error), possibly more effort than is
> warranted.



Hi Adrian -

I understood what Natasha was saying, but understandably (as the writer) I
do not believe the piece to be riddled with indefensible statements. But
without concrete criticisms, I cannot offer concrete responses. I know that
Natasha is busy, as we all are, but it's a little unjfair to essentially say
"this sucks" and adopt the philosophical high ground, without giving the
opportunity to rebut. In my humble opinion, if the merest outline of a point
cannot be made (for time or any other reasons), then one shouldn't give the
impression that an argument has already been made and won.

Having said that, logging in just now I see that Natasha has given some
examples which I will be able to respond to.

- A
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110906/bcaf5dac/attachment.html>