Re: Chariots of the gods? (fwd)
Jesse S. Cook III (jcook@AWOD.COM)
Fri, 4 Oct 1996 13:56:21 -0400
On 3 October 1996, Martin Cohen responded:
>On Thu, 3 Oct 1996, Jesse S. Cook III replied again:
>>>>>JSC>Only if you were ignorant, as you apparently are, of the real
>>>>>>under which those to whom you say you would switch lived. Even those
>>>>>>"severly impacted victims of modern world capitalism" have a more humane
>>>>>>lifestyle. You are idealizing what you are ignorant of, as did
>>>>>>"Noble Savage" fame.
>Why don't you finally educate us as to the "true nature" of our human
It would be useless. You are uneducable.
>>>MC>Of course there are species with less of a capacity for violence.
>>JSC>Name one and tell us how its and our capacity for violence was measured.
>Members of most species are less violent towards conspecifics.
I repeat: name one and tell us how its and our capacity for violence was
>>JSC>You just don't face facts.
>Quit beating around the bush. What are the "facts"?
That's what I mean.
>(much has been cut along the way, to save both the readers [and] myself
>the circular and [*]ad hominem[*] arguments of Mr. [Cohen].)
>>>MC>Just how common was human sacrifice? I know it has occurred in a
>>>places and times, but gosh, it seems to be much more common in comic books
>>>than in either the ethnographic or historical record.
>>JSC>Granted, it might not be too common in the ethnographic records (which are
>>drawn on peoples living in fairly recent times), but if you think it was not
>>common in the ancient world (Old as well as New), you are only displaying
>>your ignorance again.
>I am familar with specific tribes in the New World who practiced
>sacrifice, usually of military prisoners.
You said "specific". Be specific. Which ones?
>Many more didn't.
How many is "many"? And how did you arrive at that conclusion?
>As to the Old World, again they seem to be the exceptions, not the rule.
What "seem to be the exceptions"?
>Where is your data?
>What is your evidence?
>How far back do you go?
>>>MC>You also said that for
>>>Eskimos and !Kung to have had the kind of handle on their own technology
>>>that has been reported by ethnographers would require them to have our
>>>level of consciousness.
>>JSC>That is wrong. I never said that.
>Excuse me, but when I described the Eskimo and !Kung abilities to master
>their own technologies with the same capcity we have (an almost
>self-evident statement even if it were undocumented), you said "only if
>they had our level of consciousness."
>Since the first statement is true, they must, by your definition, have our
>"level of consciousness." So in fact, you did say this!
Gawd, Cohen! How did you get a PhD with that level of reading
comprehension? Your original words (in your posting of 28 September 1996)
were: "...a single !Kung or Eskimo could know it all, with the same
intellectual capacity as any of us."
It was (and is) is my contention that, to have "the same intellectual
capacity as any of us" (to quote you), "they would have to have our level of
consciousness" (to quote myself).
>Finally, I hope everyone on the list will understand if I discontinue my
>participation in this thread.
I'm sure groans of disappointment were illicited by this statement.
>I am very busy now
All of a sudden he's "very busy".
>and this is obviously going nowhere.
Quite right, and I daresay that is the real reason.
>I will try and sit on my hands next time I see one of Mr. Cook's raves.
Please try very hard.
>This in no way implies that I feel intellectually defeated, just tired and
>Perhaps if Mr. Cook knew how to present an argument
>rather than refer to others as ignorant and his own point as self-evident,
>we may all be more open to at least considering his point of view.
Speak for yourself Mr. Cohen.
>As it stands, he has no conherent point of view.
>I think I got IT!
Incoherence is all you've got.
Any resemblence between that and the real thing is purely coincidental.
Jesse S. Cook III E-Mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Post Office Box 40984 or
Charleston, SC 29485 USA email@example.com
"...it is not for our faults that we are disliked and even hated,
but for our qualities."--Bernard Berenson (1865-1959)