tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post113019062196311410..comments2023-10-10T08:02:18.073-04:00Comments on Rationally Speaking: Passion of the Penguins, an updateUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-1130292599211811842005-10-25T22:09:00.000-04:002005-10-25T22:09:00.000-04:00That's a good one, John. :-)Another interesting se...That's a good one, John. :-)<BR/><BR/>Another interesting selective perception on the part of the conservatives was to say (I don't remember who was the guy, but he was pretty excited) that the movie was a strong argument for a designer. Did the guy really watch the movie? Did he pay any attention? I mean, if THAT system of reproduction was designed, it was clearly not any kind of intelligent designer for sure...<BR/><BR/>And they also forget to mention the frustrated female who wants to kidnap some other chick when hers dies. What's that supposed to mean in the conservatives' interpretations?<BR/><BR/>Oh, well. It's just a (beautifully made) nature documentary about a funny bird. <BR/><BR/>JAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-1130210533846963492005-10-24T23:22:00.000-04:002005-10-24T23:22:00.000-04:00"(thus committing what in philosophy is known as t..."(thus committing what in philosophy is known as the naturalistic fallacy of deriving ethical judgments from facts about nature)" <BR/><BR/>Then the opposite sort of inference, when one derives [un]ethical judgments from facts about nature must be a fallacy too. <BR/><BR/>For some reason, it just wouldn't be logical for that to only work one way. <BR/><BR/>Not that I care about movies, I really don't. But being .5 French, I can say with total confidence, that the French (culturally) are rather idiotic on issues related to their feelings QUITE OFTEN. <BR/><BR/>cAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com