From: russ@wpg.com (Russell Lawrence)
Subject: Re: Hunter's legitimate concern
Organization: WP Group
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 00:17:10 GMT


Russell Lawrence writes:
rl> I agree with you that everyone should listen to facts and reason.
rl> 
rl> Unfortunately, many people choose to ignore empirical and rational
rl> arguments whenever and whereever those arguments conflict with their
rl> own peculiar beliefs.
rl>  
rl> I have a question for you, Mr Linan: Are you willing to listen to 
rl> facts and reason?  Or, do you still contend that beliefs and 
rl> truths are one and the same?  eg, "I believe it, therefore it 
rl> must be true".  

Mike Linan writes:
ml> I think most people feel their beliefs are the truth and have no reason
ml> to believe otherwise unless evidence is produce to prove their beliefs
ml> wrong.  Often times it is not that black and white though.

Russell Lawrence replies:
rl> Perhaps.  Let's suppose that you were confronted by a woman who 
rl> told you that she was a messenger of the Goddess Diana and that 
rl> Diana had instructed her to tell you that your hunting practices 
rl> are offensive, not only to Diana herself, but to the rest of the Olympian 
rl> Gods as well.  In view of the fact that you'd be hardpressed to 
rl> disprove such claims, would you consider them to be examples of 
rl> "facts and reason"?  

From article <15415hINN6d9@agate.berkeley.edu>, by linan@argon.berkeley.edu (Mike Linan):
ml> Am I supposed to know or care who this Goddess Diana is?  I 
ml> follow my own beliefs and I consider them every bit as important 
ml> and valid as yours or anybody else's.  

I realize that you blindly follow your beliefs, just as someone 
who worships the Goddess Diana might insist on blindly following 
their beliefs.  What I'm asking you to explain is this: How does 
your willingness to blindly believe what you want to believe fit 
in with your tendency to accuse your opponents of failing to 
listen to "facts and reason"?  Are you really thinking factually and 
reasonably when you tell us that your practices are good simply 
because one of the "gods" has told you so?  

rl> To the extent that we confuse mere beliefs with facts and reason,
rl> are we not allowing ourselves to be mislead by all sorts of lies
rl> and insanities?

ml> What "facts and reason" and what "lies and insanities" are you 
ml> speaking of Russell?  Exactly how do you view us being mislead in 
ml> the context of this discussion?  

You've stated previously that your (mis)treatment of animals is 
ultimately justifiable by virtue of the permission of a god or 
group of gods.  Although you've presented no evidence whatsoever 
to verify that this god or group of gods truly exists, and that 
he/she supports your behavior, you expect your opponents to 
accept your claims at face value pending their ability to provide 
contrary proof.  Using this same standard of "reasoning" [we're 
using the term "reason" loosely here], would it not be 
appropriate for you to suspend your current practices until 
you're in a position to disprove the claim that Goddess Diana 
thoroughly disapproves of your behavior?

-- 
Russell Lawrence, WP Group, New Orleans (504) 443-5000
russ@wpg.com   uunet!wpg!russ