Nick, I completely approve,
Despite the fact that I totally disagree with the suggestion that -
the pursuit of wisdom is not part of the aims of Friends of Wisdom, or
that discussions do not, one way or another, help Friends of Wisdom
:-)
After the formin' and stormin' comes the normin'
Situation normal.
Ian
On 5/31/06, Nicholas Maxwell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Dear Friends of Wisdom,
>
> Whereas some FoW are
> happy to discuss issues concerning the pursuit of wisdom, others are unhappy
> at the number of emails they are receiving. In order to solve this problem,
> this conflict of interests, I propose that we create two inter-linked lists.
>
> The primary list, the
> one we have at present (technically, the sub-list) is reserved for emails
> that make an initial contribution - emails that seek, in one way or other,
> to help Friends of Wisdom achieve its aims. The secondary list, a new one,
> (technically the super-list) is devoted to discussion and debate.
>
> These two lists will be
> set up so that:-
>
> 1. Emails sent to the primary list will go only to that list.
> 2. Replies to the primary list will go to the secondary list only.
> 3. Emails sent to the secondary list, and replies to them, will go to the
> secondary list only.
>
> The list helpline has
> assured me that this can be done.
>
> My hope is that this
> will succeed in resolving our present conflict of interests.
>
> It will do so only if
> FoW exercise restraint when contemplating contributing to the primary list.
> Such contributions should address the main concerns of FoW. What these are,
> at present, may be gleaned from our website: www.knowledgetowisdom.org . If
> you have not already done so, I hope you will take a few minutes to read,
> not just the home page, but the other pages as well: "Basic Argument":
> www.knowledgetowisdom.org/basic_arg.htm
> "What Went Wrong?":
> www.knowledgetowisdom.org/What_Wrong.htm and "What Needs
> to Change?": www.knowledgetowisdom.org/change.htm. The
> last page strikes me as especially important as it contains a list of 16
> changes which, it is suggested, need to be made to academic inquiry if it is
> to be well-designed and effective in helping people realize what is of value
> in life (by intellectual and educational means). I have added some links to
> groups, departments and organizations which may be regarded as seeking to
> help bring the specified change about, or as putting what we propose into
> practice. I would be grateful for suggestions for more such links. "What
> Needs to Change?" also lists 11 humanitarian aspirations.
>
> Many FoW, I am sure, will
> disagree with some of the points made on the website. It does, however, I
> think, indicate the kind of issues FoW should primarily be concerned with.
> Initial emails that touch only tangentially on these concerns - emails
> about, perhaps, the finer points of unified field theory or of Hegelian
> philosophy - should be sent to the secondary, discussion list, and not to
> the primary list.
>
> If you send an email to
> the primary list which is likely to stimulate discussion, and you do not
> belong to the secondary list, you should probably join, if only temporarily,
> so that you can learn of, and perhaps respond to, replies. Others too, of
> course, can join temporarily to follow or contribute to discussion of
> particular issues.
>
> I propose that the address
> of the primary list (the sub-list) be what our list is at present:
> [log in to unmask] , and the secondary, discussion list (the
> super-list) be [log in to unmask] , the "D"
> standing for "discussion".
>
> I hope all this meets with
> some approval, and achieves what it is intended to achieve.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Nick
> www.nick-maxwell.demon.co.uk
|
