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