Well, since you went with a point by point critique...<br><br>You might have missed my earlier clarification - I was making a joke about absolute statements.<br><br>I have not been on this list for very long. Perhaps I used 'trolling' incorrectly. I meant "generally attempting to get a reaction" - which was not intended to judge the total of your contribution to date as much your mood at that moment.
<br><br>"been there done that" - that's a great way to follow a criticism about how banally standard my own comment was. Again, I failed to express myself in a way that you would appreciate my point. Attacking "religion" as a broad category of worldview without allowing for the possibility that it has value for those who 'believe' is a one-side approach. This strikes me as being similarly effective as a devout worshipper trying to convince you to give up your rationality to embrace their belief. "You're wrong, change your thinking to my view" is rarely an effective way to influence someone. I would suggest that if you really wanted to disinfect a particular strain of religious belief that you would have to understand the behavior of the meme in much the same way the biological viral activity is studied before it can be effectively countered with drugs.
<br><br>Ok then, I am not sorry for you. I also do not have contempt either. To be honest I really don't care much beyond reading any particular email. I will say that I do actually recognize your name now that I look - I'm not sure why, perhaps you wrote something in the past that (at that moment) struck me as particularly relevant or well stated. "this form of attack" is an interesting way to express this thought - I meant no offense. If you took my tone as such... (I can't say I'm sorry, you've already expressed how that is a damned lie) ... too bad, get over it. :) BTW, I do not consider myself a "religious nincompoop" - I was mostly just playing devil's advocate.
<br><br>Perhaps it was *I* who was 'trolling' at the time. Thanks for playing along. This may be one of the longest threads I have participated in for a while.<br><br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 9/28/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">
John K Clark</b> <<a href="mailto:jonkc@att.net">jonkc@att.net</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Mike Dougherty Wrote:
<br><br>> Absolute statements are stupid.<br><br>Rather like the one you just wrote. And if you can't call a spade a spade on<br>the Extropian list where the hell can you? Religion is stupid. Absolutely!<br><br>> If you're just trolling
<br><br>I'm flattered. As I've been on this list for over a decade so you must think<br>I deserve to be in the Guinness Book of world records as the longest living<br>troll in internet history.<br><br>> If you really are too close-minded
<br><br>One should always be open minded, but not so open minded that all your<br>brains fall out.<br><br>>to realize that your anti-religious beliefs are approaching religious zeal<br><br>Standard attack. You know your opponent hates religion so you accuse your
<br>opponent of being religious. Boring. Been there done that.<br><br>> then I am sorry for you.<br><br>Bullshit. You are lying through your teeth. Whenever somebody uses the<br>cliché "I am sorry for you" they are never, EVER, expressing genuine
<br>sympathy, rather they are trying to express contempt. However this form of<br>attack has proven to be somewhat less than brilliantly effective with me.<br>Whenever a religious nincompoop says he doesn't like what I say I am proud.
<br>PROUD!<br><br> John K Clark <a href="mailto:jonkc@att.net">jonkc@att.net</a><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>extropy-chat mailing list<br><a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org">
extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a><br><a href="http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat">http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat</a><br></blockquote></div><br>