<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2873" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Bill,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>I don't quite see it this way.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>As Nils suggested, each person can deal with any post any way
they see fit. I don't filter any views though I frequently stop reading
some after only a sentence or two.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>I think having opposing views has been/is healthy in many
ways. Some of the things that Tony, Dick, Donovan, Ed Cooper-Swan, Farris,
etc have posted have been impressive for their dearth of real facts (as
opposed to "facts" obviously created for the occasion) and for their dearth of
coherent argument and understanding of the complexities of reality. Joe
Campbell must be amassing a ton of material for his logic classes to use as
entertaining examples of fallacious arguments.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>There seems to be two Tonys and two Dicks. Once in
awhile Tony is capable of presenting a reasonable argument with semi-true,albeit
incomplete, over-simplified premises and at least a correct formal
structure. But many of his postings reflect a childlike naiveté about
truth and argument structure.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Dick's postings also reflect an extreme logical and
epistemological naiveté. He apparently thinks that because he asserts the
"X is true" without cogent argument or evidence, we should just accept his
word. Sometimes he just refuses to defend the basis of his views. It
is almost like Dick does not understand that assertions need to be supported
with evidence and logical argument. Personally, the time it takes to
correct his illogical/incorrectly informed postings is generally not
worth the effort since Dick hardly ever responds to the counter-arguments
and counterexamples made. Dick's specialty is feeling sorry for himself
(e.g. "dog-piling" <EM>What do you expect, Dick, when you post such
asinine, unsupported ramblings</EM>) and then attacking the critic without
addressing the criticism made.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>Having opposing views expressed on this forum has another
useful function. Some of these postings exhibit amazing ignorance and
arrogance not uncharacteristic of the views of a segment of our general
population. This is a reminder of several things, among them that forging
a consensus in a democratic republic is an extremely difficult endeavor when
rationality apparently counts for so little. Another lesson to be
learned: It is more much more difficult to "prove" the truth of ethical
dicta than it is to "prove" the truths, for example, of all the knowledge used
to send persons to the moon, return them safely, and televise worldwide it in
real-time.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4>One element of democratic philosophy is the concept of the
market place of ideas and the belief that truth will win out in the long
run. We should not disallow or ignore entries into that market.
Hopefully time and discussion will separate the Edsels and Yugos from the
Lexuses. If Dick, Tony, et al wish to persuade us, then they need do it
with verifiable facts and coherent argument. If not, then they are merely
entertaining us with their ignorance and naiveté or annoying us with
same. In either case considering the likelihood of their influence, no
real harm is done.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=4><BR>Art Deco (Wayne A. Fox)<BR><A
href="mailto:deco@moscow.com">deco@moscow.com</A><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message -----
<DIV style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A
title=london@moscow.com href="mailto:london@moscow.com">Bill London</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A title=vision2020@moscow.com
href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020@moscow.com</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Friday, June 02, 2006 10:58 AM</DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> [Vision2020] is V2020 doomed?</DIV></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I have heard from a few people lately who think
V2020 is doomed. The horrible mean-spirited postings of late have
disgusted many of us. What is to be done?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>I haven't given up on V2020. I think we need to deal with the
present problem on V2020. The problem is that following the Lewiston
Tribune feature, a couple of hot-head arch-conservatives decided to have some
fun with the liberals in Moscow. So they joined and started
screaming. And we jumped for the bait. What I suggest is that we
practice what Doug Wilson is so clever at using...old-fashioned shunning.
We should all stop responding to the postings from tony and dick. This
tactic has worked before on V2020. I would suggest trying it again.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>BL</FONT></DIV>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_____________________________________________________<BR> List
services made available by First Step Internet, <BR> serving the
communities of the Palouse since 1994.
<BR>
http://www.fsr.net
<BR>
mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com<BR>/////////////////////////////////////////////////////<BR></BODY></HTML>