I agree about the evil in everyone. As Soljenistsyn wrote, the line cuts the heart of each individual:
Gradually it was disclosed to me that the line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either — but right through every human heart — and through all human hearts. This line shifts. Inside us, it oscillates with the years. And even within hearts overwhelmed by evil, one small bridgehead of good is retained. And even in the best of all hearts, there remains … an unuprooted small corner of evil.
It takes real courage to say that you Continue reading #30 On honesty
Yeah, you’re probably right. I’m just trying to be part of the fun of a unique, intricate worldview but strict naturalism is hard to argue against. You don’t really need the more pragmatic parts of your argument either, namely cordoning off existence in order to illegitimatize bad concepts. It only brings more questions, like does this mean that only things that exist should matter?
Continuing along this thread. Yes some abstractions are more fake than others. And this implies that some are more real than others. Continue reading #18 On truth, beauty and exploitation
Good Christ McGann. Moon “shots”, shoving turds through keyholes, condescension towards your erstwhile colleagues — maybe we needed the tone lowered. Tits.
You also said: Continue reading #9 On resistance
You’ve reminded me that you dabbled in high school debating. I remember something funny about that story. You undermined it or won by completely distracting the crowd or something?
I’m thinking I’ve been wrong to use the word “rhetoric”. That word captures the style aspect part, but still focuses on an end result: being effective or persuasive. The thing is, if we live in a world is too complex to be understood, what good is persuasion? Wouldn’t it be disingenuous or even unethical to Continue reading #6 On idiosyncrasies