X-Message-Number: 10182
Date: Wed, 05 Aug 1998 08:15:06 -0700
From: Rand Simberg <>
Subject: Rational versus Non-Rational Approaches

Bob Ettinger noted:

>Brian even says it needs to be shown that a rational approach is better
>than a non-rational approach. Well, the only way a non-rational approach 
>could be "better" (more effective in furthering your most basic values) 
>is by accident. If I am missing something here, I await instruction.

Suppose that your most basic values require a non-rational approach (e.g.,
Baptist fundamentalism).  Sorry, Bob, but while I like rationality, and so
apparently do you, there is no way to prove that it is a "better" approach
outside of a rational value system.  If one doesn't accept rationality as
axiomatic, it is impossible to prove its worth.  You have never explained
how you intend to get around the Incompleteness Theorem.
************************************************************************
  * 310 372-7963 (CA) 307 739-1296 (Jackson Hole)  
interglobal space lines  * 307 733-1391 (Fax) http://www.interglobal.org 

"Extraordinary launch vehicles require extraordinary markets..."

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=10182