[extropy-chat] can't war protesters do better?

[Samantha Atkins]

On Aug 8, 2005, at 5:22 AM, Brian Lee wrote:

>> From: Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at mac.com>
>> To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
>> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] can't war protesters do better?
>> Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2005 03:21:30 -0700
>>
>> On Aug 8, 2005, at 2:25 AM, Brian Lee wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I find it comical that you harangue the red staters for being   
>>> stupid and then express your own stupidity by calling them  
>>> "country- bumpkin citizens of dumbf*ckistan".
>>>
>>> There's a name for those who can't understand the viewpoints of   
>>> others: fundamentalists.
>>>
>>
>> Sorry, but no.  That is not the meaning of "fundamentalist".
>>
>
> Yes, it is actually. In this case, the source providing the Truth  
> is himself. He does not consider the opinions of others when making  
> decisions. Throw up your definition of fundamentalist, maybe I'm  
> just getting disconnected

fundamentalism |ˌfəndəˈmentlˌizəm| |ˈfəndəˌmɛn(t)lˈɪzəm|  
|fʌndəˌmɛnt(ə)lɪz(ə)m|
noun
a form of Protestant Christianity that upholds belief in the strict  
and literal interpretation of the Bible, including its narratives,  
doctrines, prophecies, and moral laws.
• strict maintenance of ancient or fundamental doctrines of any  
religion or ideology, notably Islam.

Not considering the opinion of others is not part of the definition.

>
>
>>
>>
>>> You're acting like a fundamentalist in your belief that you are   
>>> correct and tons of others are wrong. It goes both ways. I think   
>>> calling 51% of the US idiots is no way to further your cause.
>>>
>>
>> Over 70% of Americans believe in literal miracles and think  
>> evolution  is bunk.  Clearly more than 51% of Americans are in  
>> fact idiots.
>>
>
> No, this doesn't mean they are idiots. It just means they have an  
> incorrect view on miracles/evolution. I once worked with a content  
> director who was in the habit of saying stuff like "Who was the  
> fucking idiot who misspelled 'the' on the main page". An error does  
> not create an idiot (especially when made by a CS graduate from  
> Yale who was pretty smart).


I stand corrected in that the definition of idiot includes actual low  
intelligence.  So what is a good word for the apparent majority of  
the population which is (largely willingly) clinging to indefensible  
BS?  It is not that they have honest incorrect views.   There is a  
huge defense racket to preserve those notions regardless of any and  
all evidence, argument or logic.   They are functionally dumb.

- samantha

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050808/3e70cac5/attachment.html>