From: Matthew James Gering <mgering@ecosystems.net>
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 16:44:46 +0800
To: "Cypherpunks (E-mail)" <cypherpunks@cyberpass.net>
Subject: RE: Democracy... (fwd)
Message-ID: <33CCFE438B9DD01192E800A024C84A192846BB@mossbay.chaffeyhomes.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



> > Forget about the origination of the word,
> 
> There's your first problem, your argument won't stand in the 

No, there is a strict difference between the defining a word and
defining a philosophy coined after that word. Certainly Marxism,
Leninism and Stalinism all claimed to be Communism, regardless of how
much or little resemblance they bear to a strict definition of the word
communism.

> A personal philosophy is a religion, different words 
> but same idea.

> Religion and by extension faith are not
> constrained by reason or logic.

How do you account for this contradiction. I hold a personal philosophy
that is strictly and absolutely constrained by reason and logic.

> > There is no reason to think that a god does exist, so why 
> > would one even need to think about or believe in the negative.
> 
> There is no reason to believe one doesn't either.

Do you believe in THE FORCE, as described by the great prophet George
Lucas?

If you say "Yes," am I to claim that is your *religious* belief, not
subject to reason, logic or empirical evidence? If you say "No," am I to
assume that is your *religious* belief, not subject to reason, logic or
empirical evidence?

I hold no *religious* beliefs, PERIOD.

You seem to be unable to grasp that concept.

If thinking that everyone holds a religion, even religiously not holding
one(?!), is a way for you to escape rational judgement on your own
ideas, then so be it, discussion on the topic is no longer useful as
this is obviously part of your religious beliefs.

	Matt