From: Russell Wallace (email@example.com)
Date: Sun Aug 13 2006 - 12:15:05 MDT
On 8/13/06, Michael Vassar <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> But biologists already KNOW that there are lots of people who don't
> in evolution, and they don't NEED to be reminded of that everywhere.
I don't think even the most committed believer in hard takeoff would assign
it the same status as Darwin's theory of evolution :)
> they set up their discussion-places, they can set the starting assumptions
> as part of the ground rules, as was done here.
But yes, some discussion groups are set up as safe havens for those who hold
certain beliefs to discuss them without having them challenged. I don't have
a problem with that.
The impression I'm under, both from the charter and past posts, is that this
list is _not_ such a place - that it is intended as a "refuge for discussion
of advanced topics" (of which hard takeoff is only one of many), not a
refuge only for those who hold one particular belief among said topics.
One shouldn't avoid hearing opposing views, but one SHOULD stop listening to
> an opposing view after having examined it and discarded it conclusively.
And as I said, I don't intend to make a weekly sermon of this - I'll post on
the matter in future only if I again have something new to say. But I reject
the idea that only those who hold one particular belief should post - just
as I have similarly rejected that idea in other contexts where the belief in
question happened to be one I agreed with.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:57 MDT