From: Jim Choate <ravage@EINSTEIN.ssz.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 1998 08:04:40 +0800
To: cypherpunks@EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer)
Subject: Faith, logic, language, & history...
Message-ID: <199809211332.IAA16566@einstein.ssz.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text



Hi,

Some have posited that the traditional way of looking at religion, logic,
and culture is false and that in fact a new methodology of examination has
been found.

What is happening is that some faction has decided to abandon 5000+ years of
human social and religous culture in favor of a new set of definitions.
These definitions use the traditional terminology in a new manner and in
addition invoke an alternate understanding of basic logic (ie 1st Order
Predicate Calculus).

To date no proof or demonstration, only an oft repeated claim, has been
forthcoming to demonstrate the short-fall in the traditional approach.

While the issues based on faith are clearly outside the purvue of rational
proof the invocation of alternate logics to back them up is not.

It falls on the current cadre of supporters to demonstrate two things:

1.  The shortfall in comprehension or understanding that occurs with the
    traditional approach

2.  How the new system addresses these shortcoming succsfully.

In short, if these folks really want us to believe their assertion:

^(A) <> (^A)

Then they need to demonstrate why De Morgans Law and other derivations of
this logical axiom are incorrect and how this alternate inversion identity
corrects these failures.

*IF* this can be accomplished then the remainder of their argument has some
basis in consideration.

The catch they don't seem to have seen is that when one inokes an empirical
philosophy in the support of a faith based philosophy it is done at the
behest and within the guidelines of the empirical philosophy. To do
otherwise is to change the rules in the middle of the game.

How many people believe it is irrelevant, how many books are written is
irrelevant. All that matters is demonstrating the proof within the boundary
conditions. It is not an issue of personality or popularity.

Myself, I don't believe they can do it. Computers work, crypto works, man
got to the moon, medicine works, airplanes fly, etc., etc., etc.

As the saying goes, the proof is in the pudding. It's time these folks got
their butts in the kitchen.


    ____________________________________________________________________

                            The seeker is a finder.

                                     Ancient Persian Proverb

       The Armadillo Group       ,::////;::-.          James Choate
       Austin, Tx               /:'///// ``::>/|/      ravage@ssz.com
       www.ssz.com            .',  ||||    `/( e\      512-451-7087
                           -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
    --------------------------------------------------------------------