From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Reason will not decide at last; the sword will decide.
The sword: an obsolete instrument of bronze or steel,
formerly used to kill men, but here
In the sense of a symbol.
~ Robinson Jeffers ~

[edit]

For archived dialog see : Achilles Archive 1

When I first was trying to choose something to place upon this page, I selected this statement because it has long been one of my favorites. I believe that it very well summarizes the attitude of Pragmatism, which permits a broad quest for "what works" and "what works BEST", as opposed to those with various ideological and presumptive agenda, who are not inclined to listen to others with views widely divergent from their own, and in many cases, in both "right" and "left" extremes of the political spectra, are not even willing to permit open disagreement with many of their ideas and goals, if it is within their power to prevent it.

I do not seek to reveal too much about myself personally here. I honestly MUCH prefer remaining anonymous, and something of a mystery to those who seek to pin ideological labels upon others, and not make myself too easy a target for assault by some of those whose very fixed opinions and aims I am inclined to oppose. I do not expect to be very popular with some people who gravitate to some of the extremes on any side of many debates. My preferred position on many issues is what some have referred to as the "radical" center, because so few seek the truly balanced positions that permit a greater amount of sympathy and understanding towards different sides of many disputes. I would like to point out that I am no fan of a particular commercial enterprise that has made the term "Fair and Balanced" seem almost an obscene joke. Due to their own rather strongly biased operations it is a wonder that in many situations people can still employ the words they have abused with a straight face. I am also no fan of the presumptuous foolishness that such abuse will simply go away if is one is abusive enough in one's own reaction to it. Such foolishness allows many repugnant extremes of absurd abuse to become common on all sides. Some here have already accused me of abusing certain words, perhaps because I might sometimes use some in unfamiliar, though very precise and honest ways, but I thus far do not see any clear justification of that "abusive" claim, and it certainly is not my aim. My aims on this page, and any others in which I engage in dialog, is simply to explicate a few facts and ideas such as I believe might relate in significant ways to the functioning and development of this project. I truly hope that the when all is said and done, many will have been amused, entertained, and at least a little further educated on important principles and strategies by my activities here, and less likely to absolutely condemn many of the inclinations of others. This will take time, and I certainly do not expect to be on the winning side of all the battles between ideas that I engage in. I do expect to gradually win respect for my honesty and vigor, even by those who must strongly disagree with me. I am not a "Wikipediholic" so my responses will not always be immediate, and sometimes several days might pass by between my checking of things here. A dispute in which I was engaged, has for the time being settled down without a clear resolution, and having many other things to attend to, I might not be quite so active here for at least a few days as I briefly was in the last week. ~ Achilles † 20:29, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Whoa, whats with the revert on Space Elevator

How can you revert my edits, when you didn't respond to the gripes I placed on the talk page days ago. The version that I put on was more clear and concise. The current version is difficult to read and misleading. The entire article is about beanstalks... many space elevators exist in science fiction, beanstalks are the only ones that approach feasability. Why not mention that other types of space elevators exist and talk about them not in the second sentence of the article. Plowboylifestyle 23:08, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

I didn't remove any information from the article. The problem I have with putting space fountains and compressive structures at the same prominence is that they are definitely still science fiction. Where as the orbital tether is the subject of active research. Plowboylifestyle 23:35, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

Thank you for your discretion with respect to user names. If you are ever nominated for administrator be sure to drop me a note. Fred Bauder 12:12, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Julian the Apostate

Maybe you are interested in the move request under discussion at Talk:Julian the Apostate.--Ahrarara 14:25, 23 July 2006 (UTC)