----- Original Message ----- From: "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2005 10:57 AM Subject: Re: New Pope?
> * Dan Minette ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > > inevitable. Are you arguing that they are wrong? Are you arguing > > that he misquoted them? > > I'm not arguing anything. I stated (again, this has come up from you > before and I responded before) that you were wrong about history being > the only way to settle the question. OK, history was only one of two arguments that I recall you making. I'm pretty sure that you did argue for something very much like the inevitability of the triumph of free societies due to their inherent superiority. But, if you now drop that argument, that's fine. The other argument I recall is that acts that look unselfish are actually in one's own self interest. The one we spent some time on was a case of a man who went through a smoke filled apartment building knocking on his neighbors' doors to warn them to get out. IIRC, you argued that was an act of self interest because that would increase the likelihood of them saving him in some future apartment fire. I stumbled across some statistics a few months ago, so if you want to reopen the debate on this issue that's fine. Then there is the obvious option that you were being deliberately obtuse about your points so that you can claim your opponent is just dense. We differ in this in that I always try to be as clear as possible and consider it my responsibility in a reasoned debate to make my points as clear as I can. If there is a third way you've argued, that I've not seen distinctly, I think it would be worth stating explicitly. Dan M. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
