Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 19:53:43 +0000 (BST)
From: John Appleby <pyrew-AT-csv.warwick.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: New Year, Same Old Crap


On Tue, 5 Jan 1999 Unleesh-AT-aol.com wrote:

> Y'know, the rationalists think they have saved us from soooo much
> "superstition".
> Superstition was never a problem!

I'd be very interested to know how you square this with the way in which
you continually invoke Spinoza in your arguments. Given that he is
an avowed rationalist who spends a lot of his time attacking
'superstition', why are you so sympathetic to him. Is it because you
empathize with him in a way that I am somehow missing, or do you simply
think he is groovy because Deleuze says so?

> Folklore wasn't oppressing anyone.

Not sure what you mean by folklore, but I would take it to mean popular
belief systems of whatever type which do not necessarily have a rational
basis. This would then include such beliefs as 'non-white races are
sub-human'. This is bit oppressive don't you think?

Of course, by folklore you might just mean the wisdom of the woods or
something like that. However that's just silly isn't it?

> [Michael] I still say you're scared of elves. Notice that you were the
> first to mention them.

Nope, that was me.

I think that there is a place for irrationality in that it might get you
to places which reason alone cannot. However you cannot simply ditch it
altogether and claim that anything said by anybody has equal weight simply
because they empathize with each other. Anyway, if I am totally
irrational why would I bother empathizing when I could just as well ride 
rough-shod over the rest of the world?

But then I guess we're back to the 'all choices are valid argument'.

Regards

John