>Tor Forde wrote:
>>
>> The danger that a Guaranted Annual Income is posing is that it can
>be a
>> way to put people away.
>[snip]
>> A Guaranteed Annual Income could be regarded as a kind of
>scholarship
>> that lasted as long as it will take for people to be able to make
>it on
>> their own.
>You know one of the problems here: Who will judge who is worthy of
>getting such a scholarship?
>Do you think that if the Committee on Worthiness was composed of
>a bunch of rabid reductionist scientists and their
>fellow-travellers, they would fund me to spend my life digging
>"critical" [use whatever word you want] tunnels under their position
>[Weltanschauung -- err... "physical world which exists and is
>knowable independent of what people
>think about it"]?
If the prescripts says that everybody who wants to get such a
scolarship is to have it, then the work of that committee is to help
you. Maybe they can give some tips about other people doing a similar
kind of study, and how you can fund publishing your work if
necessary.
> Would they fund me to keep trying to find some
>argument
>that would do the rhetorical equivalent to them of what the Union
>Army
>was trying to do with dynamite to the Confederates in
>Petersberg by tunneling under their trenches during
>the American Civil War?
>I've been "at" this project for almost 20 years now, and I have yet
>to
>get a nickel *from* it (although I've "sunk" probably more than
>US$200,000 *into* it -- when direct expenses ($100K?) *and* lost
>income
>due
>to unpaid leaves of absence from work to go to school, etc.
>are all added in)....
