POV-Ray : Newsgroups : povray.off-topic : Germ Theory Denialism : Re: Germ Theory Denialism Server Time
3 Sep 2024 21:16:26 EDT (-0400)
  Re: Germ Theory Denialism  
From: andrel
Date: 3 Jan 2011 14:06:59
Message: <4D221E54.3030303@gmail.com>
On 3-1-2011 18:49, Warp wrote:
> andrel<byt### [at] gmailcom>  wrote:
>> On 2-1-2011 23:12, Warp wrote:
>>> andrel<byt### [at] gmailcom>   wrote:
>>>> Wait a minute, are you really claiming that the white race is superior here?
>>>
>>>     Are you seriously expecting me not to get offended by such a comment?
>
>> Why on earth would I want to offend you? What would I gain by that?
>
>    Not all offence is intentional.

Nor is being offended always justified. I think you should have known 
better by now, but that is just me.

>    I don't understand where the racial thing suddenly came up.

I though you wouldn't, so I explained it. ;)

> I wasn't even
> thinking about races when I wrote that. I was thinking about (idealistic)
> socialism vs. capitalism, and the idea that it's somehow unfair that there
> vast differences in social classes and wealth distribution.
>
>> Now suddenly you claim that
>> the elite (people born from well off parents) should be in charge.
>
>    You should read what I was responding to. Also, I didn't say that.
> I said that more *talented* people should be awarded and allowed to
> succeed, rather than forcing them down to the same line as everybody
> else, no matter how "unfair" the idea of some people succeeding (eg.
> by getting richer) might seem.
>
>    I don't even have to quote myself because you do it perfectly:
>
>> To quote you: "The brilliant people are actually stopped from achieving
>> innovation because they are forced to stand back. No matter how "unfair"
>> it might be, but some people just are naturally more talented,
>> intelligent and capable than others. This is just a fact of life and we
>> have to live with it. Rather than complain about how unfair this is, the
>> society as a whole benefits if these "elite" people are given the
>> opportunity to thrive, to innovate, to drive progress. Moreover, they
>> should actually been given incentive (eg. monetary) to do so."

There were a couple of lines from me below that where I explained that 
what you intended was not what you wrote. Don't bother quoting them, I 
can still find them in the post one up.


Post a reply to this message

Copyright 2003-2023 Persistence of Vision Raytracer Pty. Ltd.