[geeks] FW: [rescue] UPS Recommendation

[N.Miller]

On Wednesday, July 16, 2003, at 02:31 PM, Mike Meredith wrote:
> I've got a copy of the Federalist Papers and I've been skimming it. 
> It's
> interesting to note how archaic the English is considering a point I
> made elsewhere. I was aware of the tension between the federalists and
> the anti's which is why the 'state' had a question mark.

While I will agree that the language is very formal, and the
style much more Latin-like, I don't think that the meaning of
most words in use at that time differs in large part from the
meanings of today.  It may take us more time to cipher out the
meaning as a whole, due to the complex nature of the clauses,
but that's just a change in the style of writing (try reading
some legal judgements/proceedings as a comparison).

>> It's really too bad that the American public is not so well-educated
>> as it was at the time the Constitution was being put together.
>
> I somehow doubt the American public was better educated then. In 1870
> the illiteracy rate was 20% (in the US) and in 1979 the rate was 0.6%

Perhaps I should have said "on average for those who were literate"?
I know plenty of people who can read but can't string together
an argument for/against anything in a way that makes sense.  Nor
can they decipher problems with arguments others make to them
(read or spoken).  Education goes far beyond literacy.  In fact
though, I don't really mean education, I mean the ability to
think for one's own self.

I would like to say I am not biased, but I am.  A person's
color, gender, species, sexual identification, age, etc.,
mean nothing to me.  But I do pay attention to a person's
ability to think about the things they are being told or
what they are reading, and consider the biases, fallacies,
body language, etc. of the other person before they decide
to buy in.  Sheep need not apply.

>> And as Sun Tzu said, "Know thy enemy,"--the latest gun control
>> advocacy tactic is "firearm training".
>
> If you can shoot what you aim at, you've got the right level of gun
> control.
>
> Hang on a minute, I'm anti-gun!

:-) Have you ever been shooting?  Does wonders for the stress level.

Seriously, though, if you have considered the arguments for and
against, and understand the fallacies of the arguments (on both
sides), and weighed the related statistics and such, and still
come to that conclusion--OK, you are entitled to your opinion.
But don't try to get me to agree with you, you'll just annoy
yourself, and me. :-)

=Nadine=