>
> Dear C.s,
>
> On its own, ChuckO's argument amounts to nothing. By failing to claim
> anything more than that technology is "not neutral" he succeeds in saying
> nothing, as indeed he must if his implicit condemnation of technology as
> such is to survive even modest scrutiny. Clearly there are no examples of
> evil technology qua technology.
Boy aren't you clever with the subject line and the use of the word "qua" in a sentence! I bet you went to college! Which class did you take that taught you how to dismiss a person's argument without even listening to them?
I'd respond to your comments if it weren't for the two fingers firmly planted in your ears.
Chuck0