🚀 go-pugleaf

On Thu, 3 Jun 2004 07:48:18 -0700, "Mr. N"
<seattledemocracy@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>"vonroach" <hadrainc@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>news:728ub0lj2r7bvpkq7av59rkjva75sfvj3f@4ax.com...
>
>> >Uh - you know we *are* still studying Aristotle, right?
>>
>> You probably are.
>
>I have.  It's part of any basic philosophy course, as is Socrates, Cicero,
>and others of that time in history.
>
>Haven't you?

Not beyond being aware of his existence and role in tutoring
Alexander.  His ideas have all been discarded. If you find ancient
Greek superstitions amusing, then you might be amused.

>>Most of us have moved on to more recent and scientific knowledge.
>
>You seem to be under the rather bizarre impression that study of Aristotle
>prohibits one from studing others.  Why is that?  Are you some kind of
>mental defective?

Ignoring the insult which is standard for the left wing, I find
`study' of Aristotle as anything but an example of bizarre science
that one finds without the scientific method, a total waste of time.

>> >Unquestionably.  However you keep applying the term "socialist" to people
>> >who clearly are not socialists.  Why is that?
>
>> That is from the you who clearly has no idea of what `socialism' is
>
>I do actually know what socialism is - it's you who do not.  That's why you
>keep refusing to provide a definition - you know how stupid you'll make
>yourself look, which at this point shouldn't be too difficult.

I have defined my views in detail. You have not.  Your view of
`socialism' is probably as divorced from reality as Aristotle's
teachings.

>> and results in.
>
>I do know what socialism results in.
>
>> Exactly what advantage do you see in a socialist collectivist bureaucratic
>big government approach with high taxes and
>> overspending on worthless schemes?
>
>Please identify where I ever advocated socialism as a positive socioeconomic
>system.  I'll wait.
>
>This is what I mean about you repeatedly using the term inappropriately, and
>applying the term to people who are not "socialists" in any way.
>
>> I notice your remarks about `socialism' are without any specifics,
>
>What remarks are those?  I'm still waiting for you to provide a definition
>of the term.
>
>Can you?  WARNING:  once you do so, you'll be obligated to quit using it the
>way that you have been, you fucking moron.
>
Do you punctuate your everyday conversation with profanity?  Perhaps
you didn't learn as much from aristotle as you think. I have noted
this habit is common in left wingers.

>So far you and your ilk tend to apply it to anyone who is opposed to the
>foreign policies of George W. Bush.  That's not just bizarre - it's
>psychotic.

Another insult by a Bush hating neo-democrat socialist. Get over your
hate and frustration. You obviously are a fan of a collectivist
society run by a big taxing bureaucratic government. I prefer
individual freedom, individual responsibility, and individual
opportunity. A society of self-reliant individuals. You may detect a
theme.