Re: Patriarchy: Re: What Matriarchy?

Marty G. Price (mprice@Ra.MsState.Edu)
Wed, 7 Aug 1996 09:29:02 -0500

On 6 Aug 1996, Bryant wrote:

> See my response to that bit of illogic earlier in the thread. Unlike
> psychotherapy, Gale, science is not ruled by conventions of validating
> others and making them feel good about their "realities." It's hard
> nosed and judgemental. And since scientists, not psychotherapists,
> helped rid the world of smallpox (for instance), I'm inclined to find
> value in their approach to describing the world.

I'm not a psychotherapist. What I am is *not the idiot who would embrace
cold-fussion because it's "science".* I am a skeptic who is challenging
your world view because it is naive; it is not hard-nosed. It is soft and

If you believe every scientific premise, you are a fool. You will come
out embracing the latest incarnation of Herbert Spencer's social darwinism
(remember _The Bell Curve_) because it's "scientific." Or you will
attempt to argue with, instead of challenging the presuppositions of, some
idiot who chatters about "devolution" instead of "evolution."

Take your own advice. Use your brain as something besides a storage
recepticle. Challenge your own values --- only then will you gain the
understanding necessary to defend your values from others.

Blessed Be,