HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dab@ism.isc.com (Dave Butterfield)
Newsgroups: talk.philosophy.misc
Subject: Re: center of the universe
Date: 12 Nov 1992 23:51:24 GMT
Organization: x
NNTP-Posting-Host: change

friedric@kirk.fmi.uni-passau.de (Carsten Friedrich) writes:
>I have to hold a speech in which I have to claim/prove that I'm the center
>of the universe.

All you have to do is define the terms "I", "center", and "universe" in
such a way that your statement is true.

-- 
	Truth is an evaluation of a statement within a context.
From: solan@smauguio.no (Svein Olav G. Nyberg)
Newsgroups: talk.philosophy.misc
Subject: Free Will and Morality
Date: 5 Nov 92 12:43:50 GMT
Reply-To: solan@smauguio.no (Svein Olav G. Nyberg)
Organization: University of Oslo, Norway


As Holmes has so eloquently pointed out, it is from the
point our will is made up, that our responsibility starts,
and it is independent of what made our will be what it is.

Our will is our self-expression no matter whether we are
caused ourselves or not. I therefore find it better to
speak of, with Stirner, Own Will instead of Free Will.


There has been some discussion of "moral agents", and whether
these are dependant on having a Free Will or not. The
discussion has managed very well to steer clear of the
central question: "What is morality?"

I propose, again with my favourite philosopher Stirner, that
we drop all illusions about morality as something existing
apart from our own bringing it into the world. We might as
well dissolve the idea of Morality when it no longer is what
we want.

When we still retain Morality, it must be because we find
some reason to let it continue its existence. Bu
From: jcc@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Jeremy Caplan)
Subject: OBJECTIVISM
Keywords: Rand, Objectivist, Objectivism
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston Illinois.
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 19:55:33 GMT

Will SOMEBODY create an objectivist discussion group??

It is obvious that there is some debate over exactly what an objectivist
is and some of the values etc. that Rand and others advocated.

Jer



Newsgroups: talk.philosophy.misc
From: solan@smauguio.no (Svein Olav G. Nyberg)
Subject: 2-way Causality
Reply-To: solan@smauguio.no (Svein Olav G. Nyberg)
Organization: University of Oslo, Norway
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 12:33:08 GMT

Me:
|> >Don4t you assume that Causality goes in only one
|> >time-direction when you make your argument? It
|> >might fail if Causality was 2-way, you know.
|> >

D. Spurret:
|> Huh?  I'd need you to be a lot more clear about what you mean by `2-way' 
|> causality before I could respond with any clarity of my own.  Do you mean 
|> something like that there are _two_ sets of initial (or one `initial' and 
|> one `final') conditions, one at the beginning of time and one at the end, 
|> and that they interpenetrate the temporal space between them?  How is being 
|> pulled towards some future state significantly different from being pushed 
|> out of a present one?  Do you mean that prediction becomes impossible? (ie. 
|> that we cannot know the future unless we know it already?)

I do not mean the universe begins or ends, but you have otherwise
got the picture pretty right. You raise the proper sceptical argument
against 2-way causation, that "how should we know the direction of
time?", but this can easily be fixed by letting the one causality-
direction be the (by far) dominating one.

And yes, it would make prediction become impossible to some extent,
unless, of course, you utilize the whole thing, and send mesages
back in time.


Regards,
Solan
Xref: sparky talk.philosophy.misc:2431 sci.philosophy.tech:4074
From: ledwards@leland.Stanford.EDU (Laurence James Edwards)
Newsgroups: talk.philosophy.misc,sci.philosophy.tech
Subject: Re: FREE WILL 2: Neither a Determinist nor an Indeterminist be.
Date: 13 Nov 92 02:32:43 GMT
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA

In article <1992Nov12.224326.6870@guinness.idbsu.edu>, holmes@garnet.idbsu.edu (Randall Holmes) writes:
|> 
|> I agree with Spurrett that "free will" involves the notion that one
|> chooses an action and could have chosen otherwise.  But this is not
|> incompatible with determinism if one chooses the sense of possibility
|> correctly.  The sense in which the agent could have acted otherwise is
|> that _so far as he knows_ he could have acted otherwise.  This makes
|> sense in a deterministic universe because of incomplete information.
|> [.....]

It seems to me that with this one is just back to arguing that indeterminism
allows free will ... as pointed out by many when examined closely this
argument does not fair very well.

That is, with lack of knowledge certainly the world looks non-deterministic.
Since, we can never completely know the state of the universe, from our
point of view the universe is non-deterministic, even if at some level
the universe is "really" deterministic. This still does not do anything
for us in the attempt to establish that there is someting that we all
would recognize as free will.

Larry Edwards
Newsgroups: talk.philosophy.misc
From: coonstot@quads.uchicago.edu (charles orville onstott)
Subject: Martin Heidegger: Understanding and Meaning--a reading group
Summary: Reading group proposition
Keywords: Heidegger, meaning, understanding, interpretation, sign 
Reply-To: coonstot@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 22:30:36 GMT

I am planning on doing a detailed re-reading of Division 1 Section V
of Martin Heidegger's _Being and Time_.	 This chapter deals with
the concept of "Being-In."  I am most concerned, however, with the
concepts of _meaning_, _understanding_, _interpretation_, and _sign_.
Therefore, I plan to do a reading to recover these concepts and
their associated ramifications.	 I am not closed to the possibility
that this could turn out to be a criticism.

  If anyone is interested in this sort of a study, I propose an
email reading group which I will proctor.    The readings will
be designed so that most of Section V will be covered by the end of
November.  Thus, the reading will be  a little demanding.  However,
we will not be reading all of Section V, only those that are relevent
to the purpose stated above.

  Whether or not you have read Heidegger, if you would be interested
in learning Heidegger's criticism of hermeneutics and reference theory
as presented in _Being and Time_, this reading would be very useful
to you.	 This could give you an introduction to a great thinker on these
matters--and one that presents several challenges to our current
understanding of these given concepts.	The application of his
criticism ranges anywhere from Artificial Intelligence, the Human
Sciences, to Hermenuetics.

The format:  Readings will be conducted on a weekly basis with
a posting of commentary on the reading at the end of the week by
all members.  These will be forwarded to all members of the group.
Commentary on the responses should be made at will and will be
forwarded to all those involved.  At the end of November, a commentary
on the group's movement of thought on Heidegger will be made by myself
and will be open to response through December.	It may take us
1 week into December to finish the relevent sections before the
final phenomenological study of the group's thought.

If you are interested, please send me email and I will send
out the first reading set.  You will need to have your own
copy of _Being and Time_(any library should have at least 1 copy)
I will be using the english translation of this text; however,
if you know German and have a copy of _Sein und Zeit_ your
input would be valuable.

Thank You,

Charles O. Onstott, III
University of Chicago Divinity School
coonstot@midway.uchicago.edu


-- 
Charles O. Onstott, III                         (coonstot@midway.uchicago.edu)
Graduate Student in Religion and the Human Sciences
The University of Chicago Divinity School
           "For [the study of] history, too, has its fashions."  (Anouilh)
Newsgroups: talk.rumors
From: rey@lamar.ColoState.EDU (Troy Lovata)
Subject: flag burnin'
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 1992 17:47:43 GMT
Organization: Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO  80523

	I don't suppose it would make much of a difference now, but heard
from college Dems and Republicans at the University of Wisc-Madison that
Bush was going to release a tape of of Clinton burning a US flag in the '60's
the day before the election. Is this a misunderstanding of some affidavidt
I heard only fleetingly about on CNN?

  
******	censorship=death **       Go Clinton! (Bill in '96, Hillary in '00)


Newsgroups: talk.rumors
From: glocke@morgan.ucs.mun.ca (Gordon Locke  )
Subject: Re: Natural Law Party ad
Organization: Memorial University of Newfoundland
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 02:08:54 GMT

	All I know is ... I saw a poster for a meeting of the Canadian
Natural Law Party, and it sure sounded flakey to me!  I mean, all this
talk of "Science" and "True Science" ... sounds like Scientologists or
some other whacked-out cult type thing.  (All IMHO, of course!)  But
maybe this doesn't belong in talk.rumors [sic - American spelling] anymore.
I wonder if anyone over on talk.politics.whatever has any idea about
this group?  
-- 
   Gord Locke, a.k.a.    |    "I'm not an       | "The Universe is so big
glocke@morgan.ucs.mun.ca | Internet address ... | I get dizzy when I think
  Newfoundland, Canada   |   I'm a free man!"   |  about it" -Sugarcubes
From: melchar@shakala.rahul.net (Barbara Haddad)
Newsgroups: talk.rumors
Subject: test post
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 10:46:07 PST
Organization: Shakala - (Clan Zen Radio Network) Sunnyvale, CA 1-408-734-2289

    Forgive the post, but can someone e-mail me back so I'll know if I'm 
really here or only think I am.  Thanks.

------------------------------------------------------------------
Barbara Haddad  
melchar@shakala.rahul.net or shakala!melchar@clubzen.fidonet.org 
Shakala - (Clan Zen Radio Network) Sunnyvale, CA 1-408-734-2289
Newsgroups: talk.rumors
From: jsl7@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (J. Shawn Landres)
Subject: Re: flag burnin'
Reply-To: jsl7@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (J. Shawn Landres)
Organization: Columbia University
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 18:17:30 GMT

In article <BD.92Nov7095811@fluent.UUCP> bd%fluent@dartmouth.EDU writes:
>rey@lamar.ColoState.EDU (Troy Lovata) writes:
>
>>	I don't suppose it would make much of a difference now, but heard
>>from college Dems and Republicans at the University of Wisc-Madison that
>>Bush was going to release a tape of of Clinton burning a US flag in the '60's
>>the day before the election. Is this a misunderstanding of some affidavidt
>>I heard only fleetingly about on CNN?
>
>Must be a mis-hearing.  If Bush had it, he would have used it.

The rumor circulated nationwide the week before the election. Some sources 
claimed that 60 minutes had the tape, others that CNN had it. All parties -- 
the media outlets and the campaign -- firmly denied the existence of such a 
tape well before the "intended" Sunday air date. I was in the Clinton campaign
HQ in Little Rock the weekend before the election, and it wasn't even a topic
of discussion.

/S








Newsgroups: talk.rumors
From: rchabot@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Robert J Chabot)
Subject: Re: CAU$E$ OF WAR$
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 19:14:06 GMT

In article <BxB5FB.LCw@fc.sde.hp.com> pld@fc.hp.com (Paul_Dineen) writes:
>mcelwre@cnsvax.uwec.edu wrote:
>:
>:
>:
>:                                  CAU$E$ OF WAR$
>:
>:                Most ALL war$ are ARTIFICIALLY CONTRIVED by 3RD PARTIES
>:           (usually agents of the international banker$, THE MONEY
>:           CHANGER$), for HIDDEN PURPOSES.
>:
>:                In 1980, the CIA paid Saddam Hussein $8 BILLION in GOLD
>:           as a BRIBE to attack Iran, [10-16-80 "WISCONSIN REPORT" (WR),
>:           P.O. Box 45, Brookfield, WI  53005.  Back-issues might still
>:           be available.].  (It was part of the gold which had been
>:           taken out of Fort Knox several years before, IN U.S. ARMY
>:           TRUCKS, under cover of the "London Gold Pool Agreement".  The
>:           transfer was made in a secret underground warehouse in
>:           Zurich.).  BIG OIL [...]
>
>    Please, get help.

I missed the entire text.  Is this some more of the "Trilateral Commision rules
the world" diatribe?  If so, "please, get help" appears to be *very* 
appropriate advice, indeed!
From: geoffm@purplehaze.Corp.Sun.COM (Semolina Happyface)
Newsgroups: talk.rumors
Subject: Re: Natural Law Party ad
Followup-To: talk.rumors
Date: 5 Nov 1992 23:07:16 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Menlo Park, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: purplehaze.corp.sun.com



In article <92308.103710U57567@uicvm.uic.edu> Myself!!!
 <U57567@uicvm.uic.edu> writes:

>>I recall that the NatLaw types are Transcendental Meditator TM
>>types from Maharishi U.

>SO?   Is that a bad thing?  Is it a good thing?  Does it matter?


Well, what do *you* think?  Does a party made up adherents to some 
weird-assed, saffron robe-clad, vegetarian, Om-chanting fringe group 
hold any credbility with you?  It sure as hell wouldn't for me.  If
it doesm then you're not fit to vote in this man's America.


Geoff


-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
 "I mean, who the fuck cares if we know where Europe is?  The whole goddamn
   _point_ of this country is that we don't _have_ to know where Europe is.  
         We don't even need to fucking _care_." -- Curtis Yarvin
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-

Newsgroups: talk.rumors
From: lilly@nhmfl.fsu.edu (Leonhard Lilly)
Subject: Re: test post
Organization: Department of Physics, Florida State University, Tallahassee
	32306, USA
Date: 11 Nov 92 23:51:19

In article <kZD2TB11w165w@shakala.uucp> melchar@shakala.rahul.net (Barbara Haddad) writes:
> 
>     Forgive the post, but can someone e-mail me back so I'll know if I'm 
> really here or only think I am.  Thanks.
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Barbara Haddad  
> melchar@shakala.rahul.net or shakala!melchar@clubzen.fidonet.org 
> Shakala - (Clan Zen Radio Network) Sunnyvale, CA 1-408-734-2289

Posto, ergo sum....

Leo
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leonhard Lilly                     Internet:  lilly@theory.nhmfl.fsu.edu
Department of Physics                 Phone:  (904) 644 - 5075
FSU - NHMFL          
Tallahassee, FL 32306
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: andrewh@yang.earlham.edu
Newsgroups: talk.rumors
Subject: Re: Affirmative Action. Was: Re: Anita Hill to Head EEOC
Date: 12 Nov 92 06:39:38 GMT
 <BxJAAI.88H@constellation.ecn.uoknor.edu> <1992Nov11.074838.8909@nntp.uoregon.edu> <1992Nov11.174145.22132@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov>
Followup-To: alt.rush-limbaugh
Organization: Earlham College, Richmond, Indiana

In article <1992Nov11.174145.22132@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov>, tcanham@kilroy.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Tim Canham) writes:
[deletions, deletions]
> most of us as "lush of a frat boy".  The complaint and I have also seen it,
> is against the side of affirmative action that pulls in underqualified 
> minorities under an arbitrary quota system, and then holds them to a lower
> standard of productivity because of a fear of retaliation and screams of
> "Racism!" and "Discrimiantion!"  I work for a prestigious company and I am

I'm a white male who supports affirmitave action. This complaint that you speak
of explicitly ignores that black people are structurally poor in the U.S.'s
political economy and thus is wrong.
 
[more deletions]
                     
> it also angers me that I
> have an automatic disadvantage because of affirmative action.
> 
> What is the solution?  I guess right now we have a problem with an imperfect
> solution.

The problems: (1) AA isn't effective enough to pull Afro-Americans and other
marginalized groups out of the underclass. (2) AA sometimes causes
inefficiencies in various businesses because they fear litigation.

Well, there is a solution but it would be so effective that I wouldn't predict
it being legislated any time soon. (because those legislating it are white
males and their power base is made up of white male money).

Simply allow people who are discriminated against to sue their employer and
receive punitive damages. i.e. a man doesn't get the promotion but should have
sues, collects $1 million in damages and gets the job. No more discrimination
in that company.(If somone sues unjustly, then he/she won't get the job and
won't collect damages.)

The second problem that some posters mention should be solved by fairer courts.

Whaddya think?

Andrew
andrewh@yang.earlham.edu
From: luallin2386@iscsvax.uni.edu
Newsgroups: talk.rumors
Subject: Re: Natural Law Party ad
Date: 7 Nov 92 21:19:33 -0600
Organization: University of Northern Iowa

In article <5651@tivoli.UUCP>, steveb@tivoli.UUCP (Steve Benz) writes:
> 
> Not to start any unfounded slanders...  But...  I caught the end of
> Perot's show on Sunday night, and was most amazed by what followed,
> a 30-minute program from the Natural Law Party..  (The Scientists
> who are coming to save the nation.)
> 
> So the rumor of the day is, whadaya suppose the Democrats or the Republicans
> slipped these boys the money to run that show???  

Highly doubtful.   Those people had a slew of folks on the ballot here in Iowa
[they all lost], and they are funded by a bunch of 'floaters' with vastly more
money than good sense.  All of them being just a little bit on the crazy side,
they actually thought they could sway any meaningful number of voters.
> 
> 					- Steve

Sarah
From: mroberts@ptdcs2.intel.com (Mark Roberts ~)
Newsgroups: talk.rumors
Subject: Re: Natural Law Party ad
Date: 6 Nov 92 21:55:35 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation -- Aloha, Oregon

In article <lfja94INNgas@jethro.Corp.Sun.COM> geoffm@purplehaze.Corp.Sun.COM (Semolina Happyface) writes:
>
>
>In article <92308.103710U57567@uicvm.uic.edu> Myself!!!
> <U57567@uicvm.uic.edu> writes:
>
>>>I recall that the NatLaw types are Transcendental Meditator TM
>>>types from Maharishi U.
>
>>SO?   Is that a bad thing?  Is it a good thing?  Does it matter?
>
>
>Well, what do *you* think?  Does a party made up adherents to some 
>weird-assed, saffron robe-clad, vegetarian, Om-chanting fringe group 
>hold any credbility with you?  It sure as hell wouldn't for me.  If
>it doesm then you're not fit to vote in this man's America.
>
>
>Geoff


I'm glad I don't live in "this man's America"!!  In the United States of
America we are given a choice of whom we wish to vote for.  Not every
body makes informed or even 'good' decisions.  Take a look at all the good
folks out there that voted for the Republinazis with their right wing
extreemist christian agenda.  In my opinion they voted incorrectly but
at least they had a say in the workings of our government.

Don't forget, a lot of people didn't take Mr. Perot seriously either, and
he managed to get a pretty fair percentage of the popular vote and almost
threw the election.

I'm glad you live in "this man's America" and not the U.S.A. because a 
tight-assed pinko like you that would limit anothers rights to run/vote
as they think best isn't fit to vote in the U.S.A. let alone ...


-- Mark
Newsgroups: talk.rumors
From: jis@panix.com (Jack Szwergold)
Subject: Re: test
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 21:39:18 GMT
Organization: Panix, NYC

In <mjenkins.721417894@cunews> mjenkins@alfred.carleton.ca (Michael Jenkinson) writes:

>test
>>test
From: kaskubar@kirby.mayo.edu (Bruce Kaskubar)
Subject: Re: test
Organization: Mayo Foundation, Rochester MN. Campus
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 16:22:42 GMT

In article <mjenkins.721417894@cunews> mjenkins@alfred.carleton.ca  
(Michael Jenkinson) writes:
> test

Just thought I'd try testing a reply posting.  Thank you.
Organization: Freshman, MCS general, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: talk.rumors
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 22:37:15 -0500 
From: Nathan Lee Segerlind <ns2k+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: Surgeon General

>Is it true that Clinton's Surgeon General is going to be Dr. Jack Kavorkian?
>--Ray Cote

    Why yes,  he will serve next to Secretary of the Treasury Michael
Milken and Secretary of Defense Jane Fonda.
 
Newsgroups: talk.rumors
From: reidc@syscen.com (Reid Carson/Development)
Subject: Affirmative Action (was Re: Anita Hill to Head EEOC)
Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1992 00:00:24 GMT
Organization: Systems Center, Inc., Reston, VA, USA

-
Through reasoning discussed below, I am a (reluctant) supporter of AA.
I'm curious to know where the areas of disagreement lie among the
people currently engaged in this rather vehement discourse.  For the
sake of simplicity, I'll take the case of preferential treatment for
blacks.

1. Racism exists.

   Presumably not in dispute.

2. Racism influences many hiring and promotion decisions.

   Difficult to prove.  The studies of real estate agents and employment
agencies using pairs of testers demonstrate the significant impact of
racism in these areas, and I, for one, find it hard to believe that these
two classes of people are significantly more racist than the people making
most hiring and promotion decisions.  Some people may well jump off at this
point.

3. Hiring and promotion decisions are often so subjective that it is nearly
   impossible to prove that the decision was prompted by racism.

   Certainly a number of the decisions I've been tangentially involved in
had a substantial subjective element, nor do I think it should have been
otherwise.  For many jobs, things like how someone will get along with
customers or team members is a very important factor.

4. The government has a legitimate interest in promoting a more equitable
   workplace.

   Obviously, not everyone will agree with this.  Advocates of limited
government will argue that the government has no business interfering in
this area.  Others will argue that the economic disadvantages of racist
hiring will move the workplace in that direction on its own.
   I doubt that there's really any point in arguing with someone who holds
the first position, if he or she is willing to endure the enormous social
problems engendered by the current situation.  In the second case, I would
contend that the history of racism from the Civil War to the civil rights
era indicates that the free market approach will take several decades at
best, if it works at all, which need not be the case, since economic
disadvantages are not necessarily fatal.

5. Affirmative action is the best means to address the problem.

   I imagine this is where a lot of people will disagree.  I'm curious to
know what other proposals have been advanced.  I've heard of the idea of
allowing businesses to buy a "license" to discriminate, rather like the
idea of the license to pollute idea.  I think the problem with enforcement
mentioned in 3 above renders this rather ineffective.  Are there any others?


---
Reid W. Carson - reidc@syscen.com - What I tell you three times is true.