At 08:37 AM 12/14/1998 -0800, you wrote:
>John,
>
>My comments are below.
>
>---John Michael <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> Steve wrote:
>> >>If the Earth can be sentient with no justifcation or little
>> >>justification for it then so can a rock. I believe that you and
>Bryan
>> >>are on a slippery slope to having everything being sentient which of
>> >>course renders the word meaningless.
>>
>>
>> It is the sign of an acolyte to make spurious inferences and attribute
>> statements in this way. This is a perfect sample of the kind of
>statements
>> made by an "economic fundamentalist", who conceives of nothing outside
>> competition as valuable. Economic fundamentalists see value only in
>> competing with opponents, not in cooperating with partners, whatever
>the
>> justification. The acolyte's slang reveals that justification is
>need for
>> sentience. If you were to believe even for a moment that rocks have
>feelings
>> [some of which may very well have feelings], then that would be
>beneficial
>> and adviseable within a cave where there are rare stalactites. At
>least they
>> would be left alone - if the people in the cave "cooperated" with
>the rocks
>> to maintain their sentience. Who gives a flippin' heck if a rock is
>sentient
>> or not? well ....unless a person enjoys heckling.
>
>Since it is pretty much common knowledge that I am a strong free
>market advocate I think the comments above are directed primarily at
>me. Now I shall destroy John's assertion quite simply. John, I do
>not think that competition is in every instance a good thing [i.e. a
>thing to be valued above all others]. Example, competition in the
>martial arts destroys the art and turns it into a sport which is a
>distinctly different thing. What kind of "acolyte" your assumptions
>makes you I don't know nor particularly care.
I am not sure what you mean by "sport". Are you implying that sport is not
in any way artistic? I thought that a martial art was both. For instance bow
hunting - is it only a sport or is it an art. In Zen and the Art Of Archery
for instance written in 1949, the bow and the archer fuse as though they
were one unit. This makes it possible to accurately fire a bow. I fail to
fully comprehend the logical progression "competition in the martial arts
destroys the art and turns it into a sport." What are you saying that two
people sparring in karate should cooperate rather than compete so they do
not destroy the art. What about fencing? What is your definintion of art. In
order to understand what you are saying you need to define art, since what
you are saying is not based on a common understanding of art versus sport
that the two are contradictories. While I agree that sport and art have
separate meanings, they are not mutually exclusive in the sense you use the
terms. I certainly agree that competing in the arts [in terms of martial
arts] is part of the arts.
jmf
>
>> "Plants found to send nerve-like messages. New York Times, 11/17/92,
>Vol.
>> 142 Issue 49153, pC1, by Yoon, Carol Kaesuk:
>
>Yep, I heard about this article. I suppose if one really wanted too
>he or she could use it as justification to call PETA members murders
>and genocidal maniacs. I suppose it also puts the PETA member in a
>slightly tougher spot when having to choose between saving a retarded
>child, a bright dog, or a tomato plant....
>
>Steve
>
>> Discusses the discovery by a team of researchers that *the tomato
>plant uses
>> an electric signal to alert its defense system against grazing
>> caterpillars*. The new finding promises to shake up the field of
>plant cell
>> communication, where the study of electrical signaling has long been
>shunned."
>_________________________________________________________
>DO YOU YAHOO!?
>Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|