Originally posted by ScriabinHmm, I would say that is a fair representation as to what has happened here. Well.. it's nice to actually resolve a debate on this site, however mixed up it is. 🙂
Let's cut to the chase, as they say.
Bottom line, I don't think we have a disagreement -- what we have here is a failure on both our parts to communicate.
I keep saying while we can learn ... we tend not to.
You keep saying we can learn and sometimes we do.
Not much difference as to make a significant distinction, when you come down to it.
My ...[text shortened]... about God .... but I'd have to say I wouldn't rule out the idea that He plays dice ....
"So it pays to remain skeptical, flexible, and able to adapt."
Whether you believe it or not, I believe that I strive to do just this. True, I have clearly not read as much as you in the philosophical and scientific genres, but I have found that common sense and an open mind can often lead to a reasonable conclusion -- or at least a reasonable confusion. 😀
Originally posted by karnachzYou are missing one point. Mugabe is the PERFECT example of a "transnationalist progressive". He cares less for democracy than those running the UN even.
China, Saudi Arabia, and Zimbabwe are examples of countries that are less egalitarian than the US is. Should the minority of people in Zimbabwe who voted for Mugabe without being coerced be even more proud of their support of anti-egalitarianism and their opposition to universal principles of progressivism?
It's kind of interesting to wonder what would have happened in the Transvaal in 1838 or so had the British not sent in a "progressive" governor to suppress the Zulu and if the Dinka princes hadn't gotten involved.