cryptoanarchy.wiki

Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!

1996-12-11 - Re: [OFF-TOPIC]Re: PICS is not censorship

Header Data

From: ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home)
To: gt@kdn0.attnet.or.jp (Gemini Thunder)
Message Hash: 7ca1a54db91e036b128e2f0b76bcf21ef8c508ef434a0c376993e49903ec2182
Message ID: <199612110448.WAA18528@manifold.algebra.com>
Reply To: <32AE206F.2D021C6D@kdn0.attnet.or.jp>
UTC Datetime: 1996-12-11 05:08:31 UTC
Raw Date: Tue, 10 Dec 1996 21:08:31 -0800 (PST)

Raw message

From: ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home)
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 1996 21:08:31 -0800 (PST)
To: gt@kdn0.attnet.or.jp (Gemini Thunder)
Subject: Re: [OFF-TOPIC]Re: PICS is not censorship
In-Reply-To: <32AE206F.2D021C6D@kdn0.attnet.or.jp>
Message-ID: <199612110448.WAA18528@manifold.algebra.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text


Gemini Thunder wrote:
> Mike McNally wrote:
> > Gemini Thunder wrote:
> > > There are universally valid truths.  You implicitly admit so by
> > > stating "...at most, one religion is correct".
> > 
> > No, he didn't; he said "at most".  I personally think none is correct,
> > and I don't agree there are universally valid truths.  I defy you to
> > explain how you know that to be so.
> 
> Simple.  Let us consider all religions:
> 
> Now, here are our possibilities:
> 1.  All are right
> 2.  One or more is right, the remaining are wrong
> 3.  None are right
> 
> One of these possibilities must be true, but we can not know which one.
> (This is why "at most" is the very phrase that implictly admits there
> must be some universal truth concerning the validity of religions)

The fact that the universal truth exists is useless of the truth
cannot be found.

	- Igor.

Thread