🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <374blv$crg@biffvm.cs.jhu.edu>,
Paul Callahan <callahan@biffvm.cs.jhu.edu> wrote:
>osiddi1@umbc.edu (Omar Siddique) writes:
>
>>Ummm... Maybe you're over-reacting?  This fellow was looking for a
>>housemate.  He's entitled to be as picky as he wants.  I for one sure
>>wouldn't want somebody whose personality/life-view was completely
>>different from mine sharing my house.
>
>Yes, of course I'm overreacting.  I'm not really concerned with how
>people pick their housemates.  Personally, I live alone, which seems
>to solve a lot of problems.  What bothered me was really the tone of
>the posting more than anything else, the basic dichotomy: "These
>people are cool; these people aren't."  One gets the impression that
>the person who wrote the ad forms an incontrovertible judgment of
>others within the first minute of conversation, or perhaps without any
>conversation at all.
>
[...]
>-- 
>Paul Callahan 
>callahan@biffvm.cs.jhu.edu

Making snap judgements is what prejudice is _for_, my dear Paul.

Suppose 85% of religious evangelists were irritating, and only 30% of
bongo drummers were that bad.  Would you really want to talk to 100
religious evangelists to find 15 even mildly OK people?  

Life's too short not to do some pre-screening.  An open mind is a wonderful 
thing applied to science or philosophy, say, but it's a confusion of the 
problem domain to apply it to people.  Screen 'em out;  you're not going
to miss anything vital.  Facts or theories represent unique opportunities 
to enlarge your universe; people (especially roommates) are interchangeable 
and there's always more where they came from.  If they fail the test of your 
prejudice, give 'em the boot -- saves time. 

You don't need to savor every persons uniqueness like a precious flower.
Especially since the vast bulk of people have gone to such trouble to
remove any trace of individuality.

Richard W.
(departed@netcom.com)