From: anwyn@hrnowl.lonestar.org (anwyn)
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Subject: Libertarians, guns, etc.
Date: 13 Oct 92 17:46:10 GMT
Organization: Horned Owl BBS


In article <1992Oct13.030248.11000@wolves.uucp> wolfe@wolves.uucp writes:

  > 
  > In <718838988snx@hrnowl.lonestar.org> anwyn@hrnowl.lonestar.org (anwyn) writes:  > >In <1992Oct7.175213.18836@radian.uucp> markbr%radian@natinst.com writes:
  > >  > I just skimmed the article referred to above. Corum, I think we ought to
  > >  > let this idiot thread with Anwyn die. He (apparently) literally can't see
  > >  > the forest for the trees, so he denies there is such a thing as a forest
  > >  > (note carefully thought out analogy here). 
  > >
  > >In a sense this is correct. "Forest" is a human abstraction that aggregates 
  > >together the various elements that are said to make it up (trees, animals,
  > >soil ect.) This aggregation a purely arbitrary human convention.
  > >There is no underlying  "forest" reality.  . . .
  >         [Mechanistic and reductionist examination of "forest" elided]
  > 
  > Anwyn,
  >         The concept/word "forest" existed LONG before the "science" of
  > ecology came along to perform its reduction of the whole to a mere
  > network of parts.  The "purpose" of the reduction is/was not to destroy
  > the concept of "forest", but to assist the viewer to understand the
  > totality of the concept.
  > 
  >         It is, indeed, just a silly, semantic game to tell a biologist
  > that a forest doesn't exist.  A *good* biologist will remember that
  > despite the fact that they are up to their ass in alligators, they came
  > to the Everglades to preserve it.

I am not trying to attack normal usage of the word forest. (Where are you?
ANSWER: I am in the forest.) What I am saying is that if one wants to know
how the trees interact, meditation on the "forest" concept does not help.
Instead, one must study the many particular relationships in the
forest. Thus it would be stupid to say that there is a "forest"
reality that determines how things interact.

Similarly, "society". It is clear that individuals interact via a
multiplicity of particular relationships, most of which are not 
well-understood. The "society" concept does not explain how people
interact. However the word "society" is used in moralizing attempts
to impose values on other people. I am pointing out that the burden of proof
falls on those who would do this, to show that "society" actually
represents an existing reality or their arguments collapse.

  > 
  >         It is a shame to see that some of the non-physicists are still
  > caught up in the Cartesian and Theist universe, where there is simply
  > the pieces and analysis, and no synthesis as of yet.

I am not the one claiming to understand how individuals interact. The
other side is the one claiming that their understanding of "society"
gives them the right to impose their values on other people. I think
that if we adopted the scepticism that has been forced on the
physicists, towards our supposed understanding of human interaction,
we might hesitate to accept our ideas about "society" as justification
for imposing values on people them or coercing them.

  > 
  >         You play games with words, but you reveal more than you know
  > about yourself by doing so.

I am not playing games with words. I am attacking the idea that
membership in certain groups (such as "society" or the citizens of a
"state") imposes duties on people, and that these duties give certain
other people (the representatives of the mythical state) the right to
coerce people. This general class of ideas is generally called
"collectivism" and ideas of this class have caused mega-deaths in this
century. 

If you had facts or valid arguments to support your position, you
would not find it necessary to make personal remarks.
  > 
  >                                 Wolfe
  > (Whose grandfather was a founder of the American study of ecology, but
  > managed to teach me the wonder and joy of being part of nature!)
  > -- 
  > G. Wolfe Woodbury @ The Wolves Den UNIX, Durham NC         [use the maps!]
  > UUCP: ...duke!wolves!wolfe                            <Standard disclaimers
  >
  > Domain: wolfe@wolves.durham.nc.us   wolfe%wolves@cs.duke.edu
  >     Above all, we celebrate.   Celebrate the Circle Statement of Purpose
  > 
anwyn@hrnowl.lonestar.org	(Sysop horned Owl BBS)
Newsgroups: alt.pagan