Subject: Re: Difference between LISP and C++ From: Erik Naggum <email@example.com> Date: 29 Oct 2002 01:35:19 +0000 Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp Message-ID: <firstname.lastname@example.org> * Len Charest <email@example.com> | Having never seen Fox News, I can't decipher your association of it with | paranoia. But it seems typical of the longjmps of logic made by the | zombified defenders of Naggum. At a very early stage of development, most babies discover that there is a distinction between that which is and that which is not themselves. At some later stage, they discover that what they have been able to figure out about themselves also applies to other people. This is the crucial leap of empathy that some people seem to have skipped. At an even later stage, people discover, often much to their dismay, that other people are not /exactly/ like themselves, that they cannot assume that others are the same as they are, that extrapolating from their own reactions and feelings are valid only so far. A large number of people are so ordinary that they see deviations from their extrapolations from themselves so infrequently that they can immediately turn to denigratory statements like "you're wierd" or "you're nuts" or similar mental images that such people create of others in their own likeness -- where failure to be exactly like themselves, which is to say, exactly like /everybody/, is the sole reason for their rejection of other people. As soon as a real person crops up in their peripheral vision as something different from what they have previously considered to be the only possible normal people, their primary reaction is abject fear and hostility towards that which threatens their group identity. To be different is to be indecent. People who have failed to realize that not everybody is like themselves make two grave mistakes. The first is to tell people that they have failed to develop into human beings. The second is to show people how they view themselves by the way they describe other people. In this light, consider the phrase "the zombified defenders of Naggum" -- which incredibly accurately describes my /attackers/, but not my defenders. I actually find it highly amusing how some people are willing to make such enormous fools of themselves in public simply because their ersatz brain is so unevolved as to consider their self-destructive behavior /justified/ by their self-destructive feelings, misdirected towards another human being, which they routinely show that they do not consider a human being at all: That which is not as depraved and base as themselves shall not be allowed to exist and shall definitely not be respected. What we see in animals like Len Charest is the precursor to modern man, the brutality of the pack animal that has met something superior to itself and needs to gang up on it and destroy it. Rest assured that this character believes himself to be of a group who has similar thoughts to himself -- the very concept of independent thought is incommensurate with this behavior. The pack animal that most of all fears standing alone attacks those who stand alone because they mock his deepest fear. It would be hard to imagine anything less evolved that can still read and write. What has me wondering, however, is what happened to JPL that they could hire such a person, apparently twice. -- Erik Naggum, Oslo, Norway Act from reason, and failure makes you rethink and study harder. Act from faith, and failure makes you blame someone and push harder.