RE: why is there dinosaur statues and evolution of human concious

From: Mohan, Ross <MohanR_at_STARS-SMI.com>
Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2001 14:11:54 -0700
Message-ID: <F001.002E33A8.20010405135614@fatcity.com>

Keep it up, EP. I
read every word.

Even understand
most of them! <G>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr
style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"> -----Original Message-----From: Adams, Matthew (GEA, 088130) [mailto:MATT.ADAMS_at_APPL.GE.COM]Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2001 5:20 PMTo: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-LSubject: RE: why is there dinosaur statues and evolution of human concious
 I've said it before and I'll say it again. Eric, you have entirely too much free time on your hands. ;)

Matt Adams - GE Appliances - matt.adams_at_appl.ge.com Doing linear scans over an associative array is like trying to club someone to death with a loaded Uzi. 
- Larry Wall (creator of Perl) > -----Original Message----- > From: Eric D. Pierce [<A href="mailto:PierceED_at_csus.edu">mailto:PierceED_at_csus.edu] > Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2001 5:00 PM > To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L > Subject: why is there dinosaur statues and evolution of human > conciousness / RE: OT : Sinclair was RE: Metalink Again > >
 > > On 5 Apr 2001, at
 11:01, David Messer wrote: > > Date sent: Thu, 05 Apr 2001 11:01:26 -0800 > To: Multiple recipients of list ORACLE-L > <ORACLE-L_at_fatcity.com> > > > But, Eric, I'm not out to prove anything. > > Never said you were. > > By "proof" I meant when two competing pieces of "factual" information > (or references to such) are posted to a public list, then questions > can, and perhaps ought to, be raised as to the veracity/legitimacy of > the sources of the information, and the nature of the "truth claims" > represented by the different perspectives in the argument. > > > >I'm only trying to show Gates in
 > > the worst light possible. My desire to do so
 derives from > working day in > > and day out with Microsoft products. > > > I'm not exactly a fan of Gates/MS, and don't consider myself in > opposition to your main point, but I would suggest that if one has to > lie, deceive, or misrepresent in order to make the point, then one is > potentially exposing oneself to valid criticisms about a lack of > ethical consistency, and beyond that, the general efficacy of such > tactics. > > For background on tendencies toward dysfunctional (self-defeating) > nature of "social change" paradigms (and related tendencies toward > ideological/political oppositionality), I would suggest reading Rabbi > Michael Lerner's book "Surplus Powerlessness" (related commentary at > <A target=_blank href="http://www.tikkun.org/">http://www.tikkun.org/). > > As I've said before, I think the sociological backdrop to the debate > about MS has to do with the conflicts in the value systems and "world > views" of: > > > 1) the (old time) industrial strength technical/engineering "purists" > > and > > 2) the "populists", unfortunately including Gates, that weren't > afraid to do the messy job involved in taking the technology to > the masses (cheaply). > > > These "opposites" are obviously an oversimplified representation of > the extreme ends of a spectrum containing more complex elements, and > also mirror pre-existing elements in broader scientific, technical > and business "subcultures". > > I think that part of the reason that the tech elites and "purists" > may hate Gates so much is because they realized, to late, that they > lost a great opportunity make a lot of money in the mass market > because of the limitations that their "purist" engineering/tech > aesthetic placed on their entreprenurial vision & reach. In the era > when "big iron" and extremely expensive software reigned supreme, the > "purist" aesthetic proved to be very successful, but it wasn't > universally competitive once the feasibility of a "mass market" > approach emerged. > > Ironically, the value systems of tech purists tend to align with > libertarianism (which I personally think is virtuous, at least when > seen from the perspective of a > progressive/integrative/univeralist/constructivist evolutionary model > of human conciousness based on the emergence of > transformational/transcendent archetypes, such as Ken Wilber's), > whereas PC technology essentially originally came from the great > state sponsored "establishmentarian" science and technology > development efforts in the space program and defense establishment.
 > > <FONT
 size=2>> On the other hand, as various people have pointed out, I could be > completely full of cr*p. :) > > > (apologies in advance to the old timers for duplication of info)
 > > regards, <FONT
 size=2>> ep > > > -- > Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: <A target=_blank href="http://www.orafaq.com">http://www.orafaq.com > -- > Author: Eric D. Pierce > INET: PierceED_at_csus.edu > > Fat City Network Services -- (858) 538-5051 FAX: (858) 538-5051 > San Diego, California -- Public Internet access / Mailing Lists >
 > To REMOVE yourself from this mailing list, send an E-Mail message > to: ListGuru_at_fatcity.com (note EXACT spelling of 'ListGuru') and in > the message BODY, include a line containing: UNSUB ORACLE-L > (or the name of mailing list you want to be removed from). You may > also send the HELP command for other information (like subscribing). >

Received on Thu Apr 05 2001 - 16:11:54 CDT