Ok, somebody give Santa Claus back his red suit... dj
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 5:44 PM, frantheman<[email protected]> wrote: > > But, as a friend just reminded me, arguably the best in this notable > work (originated by Dan Dennett, who else?) is: > > "ludwig, n. A small beetle that looks exactly like an earwig, but is > invisible." > http://www.philosophicallexicon.com/#L > > :-) Francis > > On 27 Aug., 21:41, frantheman <[email protected]> wrote: >> I like the following definition from the Philosophical Lexicon: >> >> rand, n. An angry tirade occasioned by mistaking philosophical >> disagreement for a personal attack and/or evidence of unspeakable >> moral corruption. "When I questioned his second premise, he flew into >> a rand." Also, to attack or stigmatise through a rand. "When I >> defended socialised medicine, I was randed as a >> communist."http://www.philosophicallexicon.com/#R >> >> (I also like their definition of the verb, "to quine": quine, v. (1) >> To deny resolutely the existence or importance of something real or >> significant. "Some philosophers have quined classes, and some have >> even quined physical objects." Occasionally used intr., e.g., "You >> think I quine, sir. I assure you I do not!" (2) n. The total aggregate >> sensory surface of the world; hence quinitis, irritation of the >> quine.) >> >> Francis >> >> On 27 Aug., 17:12, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> > From >> > here:http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2009/08/24/what-we-are-not-emb... >> >> > " >> >> > Here is a good debate proposition: It ought to be less embarrassing to have >> > been influenced by Ayn Rand than by Karl Marx. >> >> > The most powerful way to argue the affirmative is to compare the number of >> > human beings murdered by the devotees of each. That line of attack ought to >> > be decisive, but I’m afraid it won’t get you far with the multitude of >> > highly-self-regarded thinkers influenced by Karl Marx. Fact is, commitment >> > to some kind of socialism and fluency in the jargon of Marxism used to be >> > mandatory for serious intellectuals. And there’s something glamorous in the >> > very idea of the intellectual. Even for those of us who came of age after >> > 1989, Marxism, like cigarettes, remains linked by association to the idea >> > of >> > the intellectual, and so, like cigarettes, shares in the intellectual’s >> > glamour. I don’t know if cigarettes or Marxism have killed more people, but >> > it’s pretty clear cigarettes are more actively stigmatized. Marxists, >> > neo-Marxists, crypto-Marxists, post-Marxists, etc. have an enduring >> > influence on intellectual fashion. So it is not only possible proudly to >> > confess Marx’s influence on one’s thought, but it remains possible in some >> > quarters to impress by doing so. It ought to be embarrassing, but it isn’t. >> > Being a bit of a Marxist is like having a closet full of pirate blouses but >> > never having to worry." >> >> > This gave me pause for consideration. Rand's philosophies have been much >> > maligned as "uncompassionate", while certain "socialist" (Marxist >> > Communist) >> > policies have been held up as an ideal, and yet, how many people have been >> > killed in the name of Randian philosophy, and how many have been killed in >> > the name of Marxist philosophy? >> >> > What do YOU think? ;) > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
