... relative to something else and you're committing a concrete absolute act based in a mind that does nothing other than mind. a conscious mind is never relativist, unless in certain mental illnesses. relativism as a strawman set up by panicking idiots and relative are plain to see, but it's impossible to be a relativist. so quite a few have screwed up. both relativist and non-...

...mainstream right-wing ink was spilt on the matter, since it's not possible to be a relativist. having a relativist mind is an oxymoron. it's not possible, since having a mind means having priorities. If relativism never existed, as you say, then how can it die? (And so, once again, sirblob goes crawling back to the A.P's, tin cup in hand-- "Aw, c'mon, guys, ...

...hotmail.com wrote: it never existed, no matter how much mainstream right-wing ink was spilt on the matter, since it's not possible to be a relativist. having a relativist mind is an oxymoron. it's not possible, since having a mind means having priorities. pragmatism is the cause of relativism, ewe idiot. fish, rorty and co. eat your rand fo supper, snippy-pants.

...something to something else, to place it relative to something else and you're committing a concrete absolute act based in a mind that does nothing other than mind. a conscious mind is never relativist, unless in certain mental illnesses. relativism as a strawman set up by panicking idiots and relative are plain to see, but it's impossible to be a relativist. so quite a few have screwed up.

On Mar 9, 6:25 am, sirbl...@hotmail.com wrote: it never existed, no matter how much mainstream right-wing ink was spilt on the matter, since it's not possible to be a relativist. having a relativist mind is an oxymoron. it's not possible, since having a mind means having priorities. pragmatism is the cause of relativism, ewe idiot.

...mainstream right-wing ink was spilt on the matter, since it's not possible to be a relativist. having a relativist mind is an oxymoron. it's not possible, since having a mind means having priorities. If relativism never existed, as you say, then how can it die? (And so, once again, sirblob goes crawling back to the A.P's, tin cup in hand-- "Aw, c'mon, guys, you helped ...

On Mar 8, 2:25 pm, sirbl...@hotmail.com wrote: it never existed, no matter how much mainstream right-wing ink was spilt on the matter, since it's not possible to be a relativist. having a relativist mind is an oxymoron. it's not possible, since having a mind means having priorities. If relativism never existed, as you say, then how can it die? W : )

On 2008-04-06, in alt.literature, James Whitehead wrote: why afraid - because the expression is famous? No. Because famously "The present king of France is bald" is not taken to be true but rather false. i dont follow - i thought the point was about attributes - and the silly idea they exist independent of things? Russell's pontification on the present king of France and his ...

"Aatu Koskensilta" <aatu.koskensilta@xortec.fi> wrote in message news:LI6Kj.322098$WL5.242193@reader1.news.saunalahti.fi... On 2008-04-03, in alt.literature, James Whitehead wrote: Famously "The king of France is bald" is true. Not very famously, I'm afraid. why afraid - because the expression is famous? Those who follow Russell in this sort of pontification would on ...

On 2008-04-03, in alt.literature, James Whitehead wrote: Famously "The king of France is bald" is true. Not very famously, I'm afraid. Those who follow Russell in this sort of pontification would on the contrary say it's false, being equivalent to There exists a unique object x, such that x is the king of France and x is bald. -- Aatu Koskensilta (aatu.koskensilta@xortec.fi)...