>
>Frank Masingill wrote to Mark Bloss about Random values                      
                      [1]
 FM> I am especially concerned with your curious statement that some
 FM> "philosophical SYSTEMS have proven to be right!"  What does this have to
 FM> do with the advent of the automobile?  Could you elaborate on the
 FM> analogy a bit more but more to the point WHAT philosophical systems have
 FM> proven to be "right?"
 
 MB> Quite simple.  Very very simple.  _You_ said that all philosophical
 MB> _systems_ proved to be "wrong".  If so, then is impossible that any
 MB> should not have been proved to be right.  Because you cannot have one
 MB> without the other.  For example, in order for your statement to be true
 MB> - then the philosophical SYSTEM whereby you derived this truth must be
 MB> "right".  And therefore you demand a contradiction - which is
 MB> impermissible.
 FM> Mark, I believe I'll refer you to my postings to John on this
 FM> subject rather than go, repetitiously, over the same ground and make
 FM> the points I've just finished making.  The erecting of a philosophical
 FM> system (ideology) is wrong and unwarranted by the very shared
 FM> experience we all have that we not only don't really know the BEGINNING
 FM> we surely don't know the END so we CAN'T know the totality of the
 FM> structure and a system is a declaration of the end of history.  The
 FM> Marx-Lenin axis was surely that, would you not agree.  This, they said
 FM> is the inevitable meaning and outcome of history and man can do nothing
 FM> else in the long run but join our "vanguard" in tracing the journey
 FM> because we are the "knowers." 
 
 I will decline, then, from arguing semantics.  A System is not equivalent
 to an ideology.  An ideology is a bastardization of a system, not the
 other way round.
 
... Reality has been cancelled due to lack of interest.
--- GEcho 1.11++TAG 2.7c
---------------