>From: Brian Siano <siano at mail.med.upenn.edu>
>
>I recall our conversation much differently. You've objected to the use of
>the term "lunatic" or "insane" to Stalin. Your main arguments were that a)
>he acquired considerable political power, which you regard as proof
>positive of sanity, and b) he could pass simple tests for social
>comportment (i.e., not chewing the rugs, ability to dress himself, etc.)
>I've pointed out that these arguments are excessively stringent (to the
>point where even obviously crazy people would be judged "not insane") and
>fallacious (acquisition of power as a mark of rationality).
Not at all. I adduced his ability to make it to the top of power against intelligent, well-informed and presumably rational people as evidence of rationality. Presumably, if Stalin were a raving nutcase, somebody in the Party would have noticed.
I see little evidence whatsoever of "insanity" on the part of Uncle Joe. BTW "insane" and "bad" are not the same thing, though you seem to be confusing them quite a bit. In fact, an insane person cannot be evil by definition.
_________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus